text
stringlengths 1
134k
| label
int64 0
1
|
|---|---|
There are layers to every good story; nuances to be explored, discussed, and shared. I first met York Region Police officer Jon Carson through Rev Bhante Saranapala, head monk at the West End Buddhist Temple in Mississuga, Canada. Bhante and I worked together on a story after a picture that had been taken in the temple showing Peel Region Police officers sitting in lotus position, eyes closed, and meditating with him went viral.
Bhante and Jon became friends through the meditation connection. After the success and interest of that story, Bhante mentioned to me that he was friends with an officer known as ‘the mindful cop,’ who was working to change the culture within his police region, helping officers become more self-aware through mindfulness training.
Bhante thought I might like to meet him. And he was right.
It was a pleasure sitting and chatting with this officer of 15 years and learning about his journey with mindfulness. Quite frankly, it’s not every day you come across a cop that meditates! His soft spoken yet confident tone made it clear he takes this seriously and has made a real lifestyle change for the better. He spoke about the great benefits that had come from his mindfulness training for not only his family and work life, but also, and most importantly, to the community he served.
But Jon wasn’t always into meditation. In fact, he says he laughed out loud when his wife (also an officer) gave him a magazine with Lieutenant Richard Goerling sitting cross-legged and meditating on the cover. At the time, he had been recovering from an accident that left him with his eighth concussion. His doctor prescribed three things to him for recovery, and, fortunately for Jon, meditation was one of them.
He talked about the synchronicity of the doctor’s prescription and the meditating cop on the cover of the magazine, and how he recognized he was “being given meditation by the universe.” Prior to this, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) had been a very real part of his life. He told me about a call he responded to in 2009 involving a very young child. “I’ve been dealing with the trauma of that incident and many others since,” said Jon. And he’s been dealing from the inside out.
PTSD affected 15-18% of officers in the U.S. in 2015, but many officers suffer in silence. The media portrays police officers as tough, stoic, manly — the alpha male rather than the vulnerable human being. But they are real people, just as susceptible to trauma and affected by violence as the rest of us. We just don’t see it, according to Jon. He knew he could either deal with his PTSD with a six-pack of beer or a sleeve of cookies, but neither was conducive to real healing.
Policing is one of the most stressful occupations out there. Typically fitness is used to help officers deal with the horrific things they see, but that doesn’t really address or treat the mental health issues. Unresolved thoughts can lead to pent up emotions, and according to one study published earlier this year, excessive anger is the prevailing emotion amongst officers. This can negatively impact the well-being of the officer, which in turn negatively impacts the well-being of the public. Recognizing the anger he felt inside, Jon read Lieutenant Richard Goerling ‘s story a number of times while recovering and began slowly incorporating meditation into his life.
He became a ‘closet meditator,’ putting his headphones in and closing his eyes at work or sneaking off with a pillow to go sit in the prayer room at the station. While some questioned what he was doing, others noticed big changes in his demeanor and language.
When I asked him why it was important for officers to have mindfulness based training, he responded, ” …Coming back to the breath. If we can have that pause between the reaction versus the response, we can be that much more effective when dealing with the public.” With all the violence we’ve seen recently involving police and civilians, it felt refreshing to meet someone actually presenting a solution to the violence that is accessible to all. The more we are aware of what is happening internally, the more we can respond calmly to the situation rather than reacting in the moment, without thought.
I also asked who Jon Carson was before mindfulness training, and he said, “a bit of a jack-ass.” He always expected people to follow his orders without question — he would show up and they would do as he said, and that’s it. Now, all of that has changed. He creates space for dialogue, and lots of it. We’ve lost sight of what effective communication looks like and how to actually ‘hear’ other people — listening deeply to the needs behind the emotionally charged statements some people make in heated situations.
Jon believes strongly in implementing mindful based training to officers and knows it can be an invaluable tool on their belt. He felt compelled to approach his bosses and present this mindful training course to all new recruits, which has since been approved. Now, York Region Police is looking to quantify their results, to encourage other forces to follow suit.
Changing police culture is not easy, and Jon has received some funny looks from some of his colleagues, but he knows change sometimes come slowly, particularly systemic change. But he also knows this has the potential to make our society a better place, to transform it, literally from the inside out. See, the thing about mindfulness is that it’s for everyone; it breaks down barriers and helps us see others as humans first, and occupation, race, or whatever else, last. Jon mentioned toward the end of our chat that if both sides remembered that we were just people, who have families, and good days and bad days — that we’re just people who make mistakes, and who learn from them — a lot of misconceptions both sides have about each other would slowly slip away.
Look out for a follow-up with @mindfulcop Jon and other officers who are boldly coming forward in the same way.
| 0 |
Sean Adl-Tabatabai in News , US // 0 Comments
The World Health Organization (WHO) have told scientists to stay silent on documents relating to the cancer-causing dangers associated with glyphosate.
In a letter, officials from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) warned scientists against disclosing information from a 2015 study that suggests that Monsanto’s weedkiller Roundup is carcinogenic.
Agweb.com reports:
The WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) distributed a report in early 2015 calling the weed killer “probably carcinogenic.”
Makers of the product say the claim is false, citing their own research into the product.
Since then, several groups using Freedom of Information Laws have asked for documents related to how the IARC decision was made, including scientists on the panel that live and work in the U.S. at U.S. institutions.
In response, the WHO said those documents pertaining to glyphosate research are private and its own property.
Reuters reports some parties are considering a lawsuit seeking to clarify whether that’s the case and if it’s subject to U.S. FOIA laws.
Glyphosate is the key ingredient of Roundup, which is sold by Monsanto. | 0 |
WASHINGTON — The White House press secretary, Sean Spicer, set off an intense backlash on Tuesday when he suggested that President Bashar of Syria was guilty of acts worse than Hitler and asserted that Hitler had not used chemical weapons, ignoring the use of gas chambers at concentration camps during the Holocaust. Mr. Spicer later apologized. During his daily briefing for reporters, Mr. Spicer was defending President Trump’s decision to order a missile strike on Syria by trying to lend gravity to the actions of Mr. Assad. American officials accuse the Syrian president of using sarin gas, a lethal chemical weapon, in an attack on a area of Idlib Province last week that killed dozens, many of them children. But in misconstruing the facts of the Holocaust — Nazi Germany’s brutally efficient, carefully orchestrated extermination of six million Jews and others — Mr. Spicer instead drew a torrent of criticism and added to the perception that the Trump White House lacks sensitivity and has a tenuous grasp of history. “We didn’t use chemical weapons in World War II,” Mr. Spicer said. “You know, you had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons. ” He continued, “So you have to, if you are Russia, ask yourself: Is this a country and a regime that you want to align yourself with?” The White House charged Tuesday that Russia had sought to cover up the Syrian government’s role in the chemical attack. Asked to clarify his remarks, Mr. Spicer then acknowledged that Hitler had used chemical agents, but maintained that there was a difference. “I think when you come to sarin gas, he was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing,” Mr. Spicer said, incorrectly, before mentioning “Holocaust centers,” an apparent reference to Nazi death camps. 160, 000 to 180, 000 Jews killed by the Nazis were from Germany, according to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Mr. Spicer’s explanation drew gasps from reporters in the briefing room. The remarks almost immediately elicited outrage on social media and correctives from scholars of the Holocaust. “Historically, it’s just wrong,” said Deborah Lipstadt, a leading historian of the Holocaust and a professor at Emory University in Atlanta. Mr. Spicer “should not be making comparisons,” Dr. Lipstadt said. “It’s, at the best, not thought out, and at the worst, shows a latent . ” Shortly after his briefing, Mr. Spicer again tried to clarify his comments, saying in a statement that he was not “trying to lessen the horrendous nature of the Holocaust. ” “I was trying to draw a distinction of the tactic of using airplanes to drop chemical weapons on population centers,” he said. “Any attack on innocent people is reprehensible and inexcusable. ” But the clarification did not quiet calls from some corners, including from Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader, for Mr. Trump to fire Mr. Spicer. By Tuesday evening, Mr. Spicer was on CNN, offering a contrite apology. “I was trying to draw a comparison for which there shouldn’t have been one,” he said. The Trump administration has a history of missteps on the Holocaust. Days after Mr. Trump took office, a White House statement marking International Holocaust Remembrance Day was sharply criticized for failing to directly mention Jews or . Nor was Tuesday the only time Mr. Spicer has shown a hazy understanding of world events or appeared not to understand the implications of his words. On Monday, he said that the president would retaliate against Syria not only if it used chemical weapons, but also barrel bombs. “If you gas a baby, if you put a barrel bomb into innocent people, I think you will see a response from this president,” Mr. Spicer said. Barrel bombs are the Assad government’s preferred tool of mass killing Syrian forces dropped more than 12, 000 of them in 2016, according to the Syrian Network for Human Rights. Mr. Spicer’s comments, if taken literally, would signal a much broader American intervention in Syria’s civil war. Mr. Spicer also said twice on Tuesday that Iran was a “failed state,” lumping it in with North Korea and Syria. Iran, though an adversary of the United States with a history of repression, is a robust, functioning state. | 1 |
Russia suggests joint engineering troops’ drills with India 27 October 2016 TASS The Russian defence minister Sergei Shoigu announced this initiative during a bilateral meeting with his Indian counterpart Manohar Parrikar. Facebook indian army , russian armed forces , drills Russian engineering troops during the Caucasus-2016 drills. Source:mil.ru
Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu suggested on Wednesday that Russia and India should hold joint engineering troops’ drills.
The Russian defence minister also invited Indian specialists to take part in the Army 2017 military and technical forum.
"The Russian defence minister announced these initiatives during a bilateral meeting with his Indian counterpart Manohar Parrikar," Defence Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov told journalists.
Russia, India will expand military cooperation with focus on Navy projects
It has been proposed that the joint maneuvers for humanitarian mine clearance should be held on the basis of the Russian international anti-mine center whose specialists took part in the operation to clear the ancient Syrian town of Palmyra of mines, he said.
The Russian defence minister also invited the Indian military to take part in the Army Games-2017.
First published by TASS . | 0 |
A FedEx courier and former security guard from Illinois was surprised with an invitation to meet with Donald Trump after the saw a story on the struggling single father. But the special meeting wasn’t the only surprise. The young man was stunned when Trump presented him with a check for $10, 000. [Shane Bouvet, a single dad, was featured in a Washington Post story highlighting his visit to D. C. to support Donald Trump’s inauguration. The paper revealed that Bouvet was headed to D. C. in a borrowed suit and donated shoes to celebrate Trump’s oath of office. “This is pretty much the biggest thing I’ve done in my life,” Bouvet told the paper. “I don’t get out much. I’m a guy. ” But a mere visit to Washington to see this historic day was far from the only notable thing about Bouvet’s visit, because Trump himself saw the paper’s feature on Bouvet and invited the young man to a meeting. On Thursday, only a day before he took the oath of office to become the 45th president of the United States of America, Donald Trump met Mr. Bouvet, shook his hand, and offered some help. “This is the greatest guy,” Trump said as he shook Bouvet’s hand in a tented area behind the Lincoln Memorial on Thursday, the Post reported. Bouvet called his father and had him say hello to the president in waiting. The laughed that Bouvet’s father, who is also named Don, has “a great name. ” After Bouvet’s phone call back home, Trump signed autographs for the young man’s son and then came the big surprise. As Mr. Bouvet prepared to end his historic meeting with the Donald Trump handed him a personal check for $10, 000. As he walked away stunned and crying, Bouvet muttered aloud, “Did that just happen?” Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail. com. | 1 |
Ireland became the first country in the world to legalize marriage by popular vote in 2015, thanks in part to the advocacy of a drag queen called Panti Bliss. A pub owner and longtime fixture on the gay scene, she rose to mainstream fame the year before the vote when her male alter ego, Rory O’Neill, was sued for criticizing a group of activists on TV for their views on homosexuality. The lawsuit sparked a national outcry known as “Pantigate. ” During the controversy, Panti made a speech about homophobia that became a viral video sensation and turned her into a symbol of the gay rights movement in Ireland. The eventual success of the campaign for marriage seemed to cement her celebrated status. That was a year and a half ago. For many activists — or drag queens — the story might have ended there, capped off by cheering crowds chanting her name at Dublin Castle when the results of the marriage referendum were announced. But Panti’s cultural footprint has expanded ever since. “He has a radio show, the theater show, he’s absolutely unstoppable,” Conor Horgan, a filmmaker who directed a documentary about Mr. O’Neill. “Panti’s brand is a movable feast. ” Mr. Horgan’s film received critical acclaim in Ireland and Britain in 2015 and made its New York premiere last weekend at the Irish Screen America film festival. It traces the last three decades of Ireland’s gay history through Mr. O’Neill’s life story. “As my mother would say, it’s quite the turn up for the books,” Mr. O’Neill said over lunch in New York. “If you’d said it to me 10 years ago, I would have looked at you. It’s pretty wild how queer Ireland has become. ” Panti is not alone. In recent years, a host of prominent Irish people have come out, including Maria Walsh, the winner of the Rose of Tralee, an Irish beauty pageant, Pat Carey, a former government minister, and Leo Varadkar, a young politician widely seen as a possible future prime minister. For Mr. O’Neill, becoming a symbol of modern Ireland has had its perks beyond the film, which is now playing in American film festivals. He has traveled the world as Panti, performing a show to houses in New York, London and Sydney. (He is in two separate shows that are in talks for a North America run.) He also released a memoir in 2014. Panti has interviewed scientists about the meaning of life for her new national radio show, and she even addressed the country last December for a “Queen’s Christmas Message. ” It was a cheeky take on a British tradition, with a towering blonde drag queen earnestly praising the nation for its changing attitudes. Those changes reach beyond marriage. Ireland’s embrace of gay rights has inspired a new generation of progressive activism on issues like abortion access, said Ailbhe Smyth, who has long campaigned for both causes. Abortion is severely restricted by the eighth amendment to Ireland’s constitution, and has been the subject of multiple referendums since 1983. Many young political activists who came of age during Pantigate and the gay marriage campaign are pushing for another referendum. Ms. Smyth called them “a cadre of people who know how to do things on the ground. ” “The victory in the ‘Yes Equality’ campaign further opened up the path for change in Ireland. People say ‘we can do this, we won this,’ ” she said. “You get that momentum and dynamism, that sense of optimism that flows from a victory. ” Panti Bliss was a leader in Ireland’s gay scene for more than two decades, an H. I. V. drag queen who hosted “The Alternative Miss Ireland” pageant for 18 years and mentored a generation of younger performers. Una Mullally, a columnist for The Irish Times, said she was not the first figure in Irish history who, at first glance, seemed like an unlikely icon. “We hold our outsiders up to become Irish heroes, whether that’s people who were queer, like Oscar Wilde, or intellectual, like Beckett, or who hated Dublin, like Joyce,” Ms. Mullally said. “Panti is in that lineage in a way. Despite our social conservatism there is a sense of devilment among Irish people. ” In New York, Mr. O’Neill said he sometimes felt conflicted about his success. The New York premiere of his film was attended by Irish diplomats and Melissa the speaker of the New York City Council, who hailed him as “a catalyst for change” in a speech. It was a far cry from his roots in the night life of the late 1980s, when he became a drag queen because it was “underground and transgressive and discombobulating,” he said. “To me it’s inherently punk,” Mr. O’Neill said. “Which is then odd for me to suddenly be an establishment figure. ” He said his performances and activism have always been devoted to expanding the idea of Irishness to include the marginalized, like migrants, religious minorities or L. G. B. T. people. He calls it “queering the Irish space. ” Did he think it was working? The question drew a laugh. “Maybe too well!” | 1 |
WASHINGTON — President Obama on Monday made an impassioned argument for his administration’s decision to instruct public schools to allow transgender students to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity, saying that society must protect the dignity and safety of vulnerable children. The remarks were the president’s first public comments on a directive released Friday that has added fuel to a searing national debate over transgender rights. Mr. Obama said the guidance, issued by the Education and Justice Departments, represented “our best judgment” on how to help schools wrestling with the issue. “We’re talking about kids, and anybody who’s been in school, been in high school, who’s been a parent, I think should realize that kids who are sometimes in the minority — kids who have a different sexual orientation or are transgender — are subject to a lot of bullying, potentially they are vulnerable,” Mr. Obama said in an interview with BuzzFeed News. “I think that it is part of our obligation as a society to make sure that everybody is treated fairly, and our kids are all loved, and that they’re protected and that their dignity is affirmed. ” The White House has said little about Mr. Obama’s role in the release of the guidance, which had been under development for months, other than to say that he had been kept apprised of its progress and that it was broadly consistent with his values. It has drawn condemnations from many Republican lawmakers who call it an example of presidential overreach. Greg Abbott, the governor of Texas, said on Monday that the guidance violated the principle of separation of powers, and state officials there have signaled that they will seek to challenge it in court. “The president is turning the Constitution on its head,” Mr. Abbott told Fox News. “He’s trying to cram down as many parts of his liberal agenda on the United States of America as he possibly can” before leaving office in January. The clash comes as the Obama administration is battling North Carolina over a law that says transgender people must use restrooms and changing facilities that correspond to their sex at birth. The Justice Department sued the state this month, arguing that the law is discriminatory. “There’s no denying that there has been a significant uptick in public consideration of these kinds of questions” because of North Carolina’s measure, Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said on Monday, before the president’s comments were published online. “The White House was not just aware of these policy deliberations but in the loop as the decisions were being made to ensure that the guidance reflected the president’s values and the president’s preferences,” he added. Mr. Obama said he would not comment on the North Carolina suit, to avoid intervening in a pending case. But he said that he expected the courts to eventually resolve the issue of how schools should treat transgender students, and that, in the meantime, his administration wanted to respond to inquiries from schools on how to proceed. “We said, ‘It is our view that you should try to treat these kids with dignity,’ ” Mr. Obama said, adding that the administration had sought to help educators and administrators by including a set of “best practices” from school districts that have enacted similar transgender policies. “There are school districts who have been wrestling with this problem and have, we think, done a good job in accommodating them in a way that is good for everybody, and so you can learn from these best practices. This is what we are advising. ” But the directive represents more than just a suggestion. While it does not carry the force of law, it signals how the administration interprets federal statutes, bringing with it an implied threat that schools that act otherwise could lose federal funding. “Ultimately, depending on how these other lawsuits go, courts will affirm or reject how we see the issue,” Mr. Obama said. | 1 |
Troubled Credit Suisse Bank Posts Surprise Profit November 04, 2016 Troubled Credit Suisse Bank Posts Surprise Profit
Credit Suisse reported an unexpected net profit for a second quarter in a row on Thursday though the surprise was largely down to real estate sales and Chief Executive Tidjane Thiam cautioned the outlook remained challenging. Just last week, TRUNEWS reported that Deutsche Bank chief John Cryan shocked the financial sector by posting a quarterly profit after expectations sent economists running for the hills. For the three months to the end of September, the Swiss bank had net profit of 41 million Swiss francs ($42.2 million), well above the average estimate for a 120 million franc loss in a Reuters poll of five analysts. The bank said it had made gains of 346 million francs from the sale of real estate and cut costs during the quarter while setting aside another 357 million francs for legal bills in cases mainly relating to mortgage-backed securities. Thiam's plan for more stable earnings by expanding wealth management and placing less reliance on investment banking had a rocky start in the face of tough markets but it has received support from major investors.
"Looking ahead, we expect market activity to continue to be influenced by geopolitical and macro-economic uncertainty over the next several quarters and the outlook to remain challenging," Thiam said in a statement.
Credit Suisse shares dropped 4 percent when the market opened following the results and are down 40 percent in 2016, lagging the European banking sector index, which has fallen 20 percent.
READ MORE: SWISS BANKS BET BIG ON NEGATIVE RATES
Analysts said, while there had been healthy inflows into the wealth management side of the business, net margins have been declining since the start of the year.
"Structurally, we remain cautious on the Wealth Management outlook driven by concerns over cost and fee pressures, as well as continued global regularization," Deutsche Bank analysts said in a note.
AHEAD ON COST CUTS
Thiam joined Zurich-based Credit Suisse in July 2015 and outlined his blueprint in October that year. He warned in September that transaction levels were lower when asked about client activity in the third quarter, though he later said it was still a "good quarter" for the bank.
In March, Credit Suisse took a bigger ax to its investment bank with a further 800 million francs in cost cuts and 2,000 more job cuts.
Credit Suisse said it expects to approach its cost base target in Global Markets of $5.4 billion by the end of 2016, two years ahead of schedule, and that it will give further updates on cost plans at an investor day on Dec. 7.
The bank has cut headcount by 5,400 so far this year out of the 6,000 it is aiming for.
Despite those reductions, headcount across the bank rose quarter-on-quarter to 47,690 from 47,180 but was down 0.8 percent year-on-year.
For example, 60 employees were added in its Global Markets division and 110 in its investmentbanking and capital markets division during the quarter.
"The third quarter normally sees a pick up in hiring with the graduate and intern intake," CFO David Mathers said. "It's a seasonal pattern. We're committed to reducing overall headcount, which also includes reducing contractors."
Its investment banking divisions, including trading and advisory and underwriting activity, reported net revenues of 2.4 billion Swiss francs, down 6.5 percent from a year earlier.
Fixed income trading across Global Markets and its APAC (Asia-Pacific) divisions rose 3.7 percent to 902 million francs, failing to benefit as much from a surge in bond trading that saw U.S. banks boost their income by more than half in the quarter.
Equity sales and trading revenue fell 38 percent to 690 million francs from a year ago, mirroring a broad decline across the industry hit by uncertain and volatile markets that have left investors more averse to risk.
In underwriting and advisory, the Swiss lender reported a 29 percent jump in revenue to 875 million francs as announced it was advising on a number of multi-billion M&A transactions. Article by Doc Burkhart , Vice-President, General Manager and co-host of TRUNEWS with Rick Wiles Got a news tip? Email us at Help support the ministry of TRUNEWS with your one-time or monthly gift of financial support. DONATE NOW ! DOWNLOAD THE TRUNEWS MOBILE APP! CLICK HERE! Donate Today! Support TRUNEWS to help build a global news network that provides a credible source for world news
We believe Christians need and deserve their own global news network to keep the worldwide Church informed, and to offer Christians a positive alternative to the anti-Christian bigotry of the mainstream news media Top Stories | 0 |
3 Thugs Try to Rape Grandaughter: Grampa Grabs Shotgun and Blasts Them Oct 28, 2016 Previous post
Another terribly violent crime occurred recently but the ending will leave you happy. Three armed intruders broke into a home and tried to gang rape a 19 year old young woman. But her grandfather came and saved the day. 67 year old Kenneth Byrd shot the armed intruders trying to attack his granddaughter!
Sadly, he was very seriously injured during the shootout. The armed thugs terrorized him, his wife, and his granddaughter. Byrd got hit with a bullet but fortunately he survived. They all lived in Lumberton. He is now in the hospital recovering. Robeson County Sheriff Kenneth Sealey confirmed the crime took place around 10 p.m. this past Monday.
Police were called to their home in the 100 block of Yedda Road in east Lumberton when police were called about a reported shooting. When the arrived on the scene they found Byrd had been shot multiple times. Members of the family told police the attack began when one of the suspects knocked on the door asking for water and speaking of car problems. Then, two other men who were wearing black clothing as well as ski masks and gloves came to the house doors and forced their way in demanding a substantial amount of money.
The suspects were shot when they pushed the older couple to their safe and then tried raping the woman. The man fired gunshots at the intruders and each of them were hit. One was 20 year old Jamie Lee Faison and
FOR ENTIRE ARTICLE CLICK LINK | 0 |
An Oregon couple fined $135, 000 for refusing to make a cake for a lesbian wedding appeared before the Oregon Court of Appeals for the first time on Thursday, in an effort to have the judgment overturned. [In one of the most notorious religious liberty cases in recent years, Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, were found guilty of discrimination in 2013 of for refusing to bake a wedding cake for a couple because it violated the tenets of their Christian faith. The court sentenced the Christian couple to a fine of $135, 000 for the “emotional damage” they had allegedly caused the lesbian pair. Rachel and Laurel had accused the Kleins of “mental rape,” adding that they had suffered a “loss of appetite” and “impaired digestion” from the ordeal, which remarkably led to simultaneous “weight gain. ” In 2015, Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian slapped a gag order on the Kleins, following the couple’s interview with Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins. During the interview, Aaron said among other things, “This fight is not over. We will continue to stand strong. ” “The Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries hereby orders [Aaron and Melissa Klein] to cease and desist from publishing, circulating, issuing or displaying, or causing to be published … any communication to the effect that any of the accommodations … will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination be made against, any person on account of their sexual orientation,” Avakian wrote. “This effectively strips us of all our First Amendment rights,” wrote the Kleins on their Facebook page. “According to the state of Oregon we neither have freedom of religion or freedom of speech. ” “We lost everything we loved and worked so hard to build,” she said. From the beginning, the Kleins have made it clear that they have never refused service to anyone based on sexual orientation, but their religious convictions did not permit them to participate in a gay wedding, which they believe to be immoral. “When we opened our bakery, we loved serving all customers who came into the shop, regardless of their identity or beliefs. My cakes were my canvas,” Melissa said. “My bakery wasn’t just called ‘Sweet Cakes Bakery,’ it was ‘Sweet Cakes by Melissa’ because I pour my passion and heart into each cake I make. My faith is a part of that. ” Although the Kleins’ situation is bleak, shifting winds in Washington may give cause for a modicum of hope. The Obama administration sent regular signals that religious liberty would be made to bow before lifestyle choices, but the Trump administration seems to be reversing previous White House hostility toward religious faith. In late 2016, the Chairman of the U. S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) attacked proponents of religious liberty, suggesting that religion is simply a cover for bigotry, prejudice, and discrimination. Martin R. Castro stated that the phrases “religious liberty” and “religious freedom” are nothing more than “code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia or any form of intolerance. ” According to Tim Schultz, the president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, the Obama administration seemed to view religion as an enemy standing in the way of their policy objectives. “They view religious freedom as a kind of inconvenient speed bump on the way to those objectives in some way,” Schultz said. This has not been the tone taken by the new administration. In his very first executive order after assuming office, President Trump sought to “ease the burden” of Obamacare by granting exemptions wherever possible to those unduly constrained by the law. Trump’s move followed a long and contentious battle between the Obama administration and the Little Sisters of the Poor, who were being coerced into providing services to which they morally objected. This week, dozens of conservatives and groups signed a letter urging President Trump to sign an executive order to protect the religious liberty of people and organizations that have been harassed by the federal government for expressing their beliefs on traditional marriage, the sanctity of life from birth to natural death, and other moral issues. The Oregon Court of Appeals is expected to issue an opinion on the case of the Christian bakers sometime in the next few months. Follow Thomas D. Williams on Twitter Follow @tdwilliamsrome | 1 |
CARACAS, Venezuela — President Nicolás Maduro was chased at a routine political event by a crowd of angry protesters banging on pots and yelling that they were hungry, just days after thousands of Venezuelans took to the streets to call for his ouster, local news media reported on Saturday. Scenes from the confrontation late Friday, which also appeared in videos uploaded to social media, captured the attention of Venezuelans, many of whom blame the unpopular president for the country’s food shortages. In one video, Mr. Maduro tries to calm the by walking among them, only to be surrounded as the furious crowd yells obscenities. “What is this?” an astounded voice behind the camera asks in one of the video clips. Mr. Maduro had traveled from the capital, Caracas, to Margarita Island off Venezuela’s northern coast to inaugurate a number of new public housing units and give a televised address. During the speech, he denounced his opponents’ calls for his removal from office, calling them “vampires” and saying they were preparing for violence. Foro Penal, a Venezuelan human rights group, said that 20 people had been arrested after the protest in the town of Villa Rosa on Margarita Island. Among those detained was Braulio Jatar, the director of a local news Web site called Reporte Confidencial, said the site, which had reported on protest against the president. Mr. Maduro’s office made no statement about the incident or the arrests. Venezuelan politicians wasted little time on Saturday in using the confrontation to advance their agendas. “The people of Villa Rosa in Margarita have no fear,” wrote Henrique Capriles, an opposition governor who lost to Mr. Maduro in the presidential election in 2013. “Through banging pots, Maduro was run out of town. ” Pedro Carvajalino, a television anchorman, said the protesters had been sent by Mr. Capriles and other members of the opposition. “It was a lack of respect to presidential dignity,” Mr. Carvajalino said. On Thursday, Mr. Maduro’s political opponents organized a mass protest in the capital, a gathering they called “the taking of Caracas. ” It was the largest protest this year as many thousands descended on the capital from around the country, chanting, singing and venting frustration with the country’s chronic shortages, most critically of food. The organizers are trying to use rising anger against the president to propel an effort to recall him from office by means of a popular referendum. If the referendum happens this year and Mr. Maduro loses, Venezuelans will have the opportunity to elect a new president. But the government, which is responsible for organizing such a vote, wishes to hold it next year. If Mr. Maduro loses in 2017, the leftist vice president will serve what is left of his term. Polls show that Mr. Maduro would be likely to lose a referendum. The confrontation in Villa Rosa suggests that the tide may have turned in an area that once supported the president. It voted for Mr. Maduro and his predecessor and mentor, Hugo Chávez, in previous elections by significant margins. | 1 |
The Australian government has taken the lead from President Donald Trump in the race to improve vetting of immigrants who may hold hostile Islamic attitudes, and to reform programs like the outsourcing visa. [“We’re defined by a commitment to common values, political values, the rule of law, democracy, freedom, mutual respect, equality for men and women,” Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull told the media on Thursday, where he described the reformed vetting process: our citizenship process should reflect that. So today we are announcing changes to strengthen citizenship, to make for a stronger Australia, stronger citizenship, stronger citizen … before you apply to be a citizen. You will need to have competent English. That is a vital requirement … also, we need to ensure that our citizenship test enables applicants to demonstrate how they have integrated into and engaged with our Australian community, so that they’re part of the community. They’ve lived here as a permanent resident for four years, they speak English, share our values, be integrated. Those are critically important elements. I believe that they will be empowering for applicants. This will be good for the applicants, good for the nation, underlining our Australian values at the very heart of Australian citizenship, Australian citizenship is the foundation of our democracy … these political values are what bind us together. That’s what keeps us together in the midst of our diversity. The new Australian push is a from 2016, when Trump championed immigration reform in the United States, while Turnbull sought to stabilize his government after he staged an internal party vote in September 2015 to take the Prime Minister’s job from his own party’s leader, Tony Abbott, an immigration hawk who entirely blocked and stopped a seaborne wave of immigrants from reaching Australia. To some extent, Turnbull’s flip towards position is designed to help his wing of the party from Abbot’s wing of the party, and from the growing support being given to Pauline Hanson‘s nationalist One Nation Party, which is skeptical about Islam’s ability to integrate into Australian society. In 2016 and before, Turnbull repeatedly endorsed immigration, invited additional refugees, and told the parliament in October 2016 that “everyone sitting in this chamber and every Australian is a beneficiary of the diversity that is at the heart of our nation … the most effective weapon against the [Muslim] terrorists is an inclusive nation. ” Amid rising violence and welfare use among immigrant Muslims, a September 2016 poll showed that half of all Australians want to block Muslim immigration, which is strongly supported by business groups which profit from the inflow of extra consumers and workers. Turnbull’s minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Peter Dutton, told reporters at the press conference that immigrants will have to take an upgraded written test: There will be further tests, further questions placed in the test as it currently operates, and there will be the opportunity for people to comment on some of these changes over the course of the next, over the course of the period between now and 1 June. So we will consult around the questions around the values issues and we can provide further detail. There is also change to be made to the pledge and, again, we’ll consult on that particular issue as well. So I’ll leave it there. For example, domestic violence, a perpetrator of domestic violence. My view is that that person shouldn’t become an Australian citizen. And we can ask that question but we can also undertake our own checks in relation to police checks or whatever the case might be. So that’s how you can adopt, apply the test. On the 2016 campaign trail, and in his Executive Orders since his inauguration, President Donald Trump has called for a new process of “extreme vetting” refugees and legal immigrants — especially Muslim immigrants — into the United States. For example, his January 27 Executive Order on immigration declared that his policy would be to exclude people with “Hostile attitudes”: In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation. The alliance of judges, progressives, and Islamic political groups are fiercely opposing any new tests, even though the existing immigration and citizenship process already includes questions and tests designed to exclude people who were terrorists or members of the Nazi or Soviet communist parties. The current immigration document also includes a requirement stemming from the 1775 war of independence which requires immigrant aristocrats to formal give up their noble titles before becoming citizens. If U. S. immigrants lie in their documents, they can be stripped of their citizenship and repatriated. For example, U. S. officials have deported several immigrants who lied about their work for Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist party in World War II. U. S. officials have not said anything about the plans for upgrading the immigration tests and vetting, partly because Trump has not yet been able to get many of his nominees confirmed by the Senate. But Homeland Security John Kelly may be a strong backer of an upgraded test, and told a D. C. audience on Tuesday that “we have a sacred duty and that is the continuation of the United States as we know it: To protect our way of life and the exceptional people we are. ” Australia’s reform government has an easier task than Trump, who must overcome roadblocks built by progressive judges, media and Democratic legislator and Democratic legislatures in a federal government for 330 million people. In contrast, Australia’s parliamentary system allows a majority government to easily pass its agenda for the nation of 25 million people. Throughout the April 19 Australian press conference, the journalists and politicians tacitly recognized the problems created by the immigration of Islamic adherents who bring their peculiar institutions and values which endorse domestic violence against women, child marriage, ‘Female Genital Mutilation,’ and reject the authority of what Australians describe as “secular law. ” For example, one reporter cited several of Islam’s peculiar practices before asking “Prime Minister, I’m not clear why practices such as female genital mutilation, forcing children to marry and what have you, how they’re being or could be included in values questions when they’re already illegal under Australian law. What’s the need for a values question when it’s illegal under Australians law, Australian law? that “these values [in the test] aren’t really enforceable outside of the law. If someone passes a test and says, “Tick, yes I don’t beat my wife. Tick, I know who [cricket player] Another journalist scoffed at the test, saying “these values [in the test] aren’t really enforceable outside of the law. If someone passes a test and says, “Tick, yes I don’t beat my wife. Tick, I know who [cricket player] Don Bradman is. I’m an Australian citizen” And then they don’t express Australian values, what happens?” Turnbull pushed back, saying: But the point is, what [the current written test] doesn’t go to or doesn’t go to sufficiently are those questions of values and at the heart, at the very heart of our success is mutual respect respect for each other, respect for people of different faiths and different cultures and respect of women and children. That is, you know as I’ve, you’ve often heard me say this. You know, not all disrespecting women, disrespecting women ends up in violence against women but that’s where all violence against women begins. So this is a very important, very important Australian values respect, mutual respect, respect for women and children and that is going to be, that is a key Australian value, who would argue with that? Is it reflected in our current process? No it’s not, it should be. On April 17, Turnbull announced his party would reform the “457” visa program, which allowed Australian companies to bring in foreign workers for skilled and unskilled jobs throughout Australia. The 457 visa will be replaced by a narrower visa program that will only be used to bring in workers who cannot be found in Australia and who can integrate Australian society, he said. That push is also similar to Trump’s effort to revamp the unpopular outsourcing program. Echoing Trump’s “Buy American, Hire American” theme, Turnbull said that the goal os his reform is “Australian jobs for Australians first … this is all about Australians’ interst, this is about jobs for Australians. ” The new program will have a “ focus on Australia’s interests,” he said. “We’re putting Australians first … Australian workers must have priority for Australian jobs,” he said. This article has been updated with additional information about Australia’s rising support for nationalist policies. Follow Neil Munro on Twitter @NeilMunroDC or email the author at NMunro@Breitbart. com, | 1 |
Written by Adam Dick It is common in presidential campaigns for surrogates to speak at events or take part in media interviews where they vouch for a presidential candidate. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has many such surrogates, including her former presidential primary opponent Bernie Sanders, her husband and former United State President Bill Clinton, and First Lady Michelle Obama. Hillary Clinton’s campaign, as is typical of presidential campaigns, also uses Clinton’s vice presidential running mate Tim Kaine as a surrogate. What is unusual is that Bill Weld, the vice presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party, has also joined the ranks of Clinton surrogates. Weld, interviewed Tuesday at MSNBC by Rachel Maddow, said that he was on her show “to vouch for Hillary Clinton.” And vouch for Clinton he did throughout the interview. Asked by Maddow if people should vote for the Libertarian presidential ticket in states where there appears to be a close race between Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump, Weld answered that Weld fears “for the country” if Trump is elected, that Trump is “stirring up envy and resentment and even hatred,” and that Trump threatens US foreign policy and the nation’s “position in the world at large.” Weld did not say “vote for Clinton,” but it is easy for viewers of the interview to fill in those blanks. Not satisfied with Weld’s implicit call for voters to support Clinton, Maddow pushed for more explicit direction from Weld. And Weld obliged. Asked why a person would vote for the Libertarian ticket headed by presidential nominee Gary Johnson in a state with a close Clinton versus Trump race, Weld answered that he has “a lot to say” about Clinton to such voters who choose not to vote Libertarian. Weld proceeded praising Clinton who he says he has known for 40 years and has worked with professionally. “I know her well personally; I know her to be a person of high moral character, a reliable person, and an honest person, however so much Mr. Trump may rant and rave to the contrary,” Weld continued. In contrast, Weld, in the interview, argued that Trump behaves like a bully and cannot “competently manage the office of the presidency.” Narrowing in more on Weld’s vote recommendation, Maddow proceeded to ask Weld the following question: “Do you honestly believe that Gary Johnson would be a better president than Hillary Clinton?” Breaking from expectations based on the history of American vice presidential nominees, Weld did not say that the head of his presidential ticket would be the best choice for president and then launch into a list of reasons. Instead, Weld gave lukewarm praise for Johnson while sidestepping the direct question. “I think he’d be capable of being a good chief executive and, yes, a commander-in-chief” said Weld regarding Johnson. Weld then returned in his answer to his focus on how Clinton is a much better choice for voters than is Trump, asserting that a President Trump would bring “chaos to the country” while a President Clinton would bring a “very businesslike and capable and competent approach to our affairs.” Included in Weld’s defense of Clinton is his declaration during the interview that people should “just ignore,” because “there is nothing there,” the Friday disclosure by Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director James B. Comey that the FBI has reopened its investigation of Clinton for mishandling classified information. Maddow then questioned Weld regarding whether his opinion on the matter conflicts with a press release in which Johnson starts off saying, as quoted by Maddow, “The newest revelations about Hillary Clinton demonstrate why America should be scared of both Clinton and Trump.” Asked by Maddow if Weld agrees with the press release , Weld confirmed that he does not. Weld then immediately proceeded in his answer to list “a number of substantive issues” on which he disagrees with Johnson — something Weld did not do in regard to Clinton. Weld’s divergence from the expected message of a Libertarian Party vice presidential nominee should not be too surprising. On May 19, the day after Johnson declared his preference that the Libertarian National Convention delegates choose Weld for the vice presidential slot, Jesse Walker, writing at Reason, pointed to Weld’s “anti-libertarian positions” on both domestic and foreign issues before concluding “if I wanted to elect an Iraq hawk for gun control, I could vote for Hillary Clinton.” Several months later Weld has come out in the open to effectively answer Walker with a resounding “Hear, hear!” Since his nomination at the Libertarian National Convention, Weld has continued to endorse positions contrary to the Libertarian Party platform and libertarian ideas. These positions include outlawing people listed on the US government’s so-called terror watch lists from buying guns and nominating far-from-libertarian individuals to the US Supreme Court. Weld has also been busy promoting Clinton during his time as the Libertarian vice presidential nominee, though maybe never before so brazenly as in his interview this week with Maddow. In September, for example, Weld declared in an MSNBC interview that he thinks “very highly” of Clinton and that he is “not sure anybody’s more qualified than Hillary Clinton to be president of the United States.” Then, last week, Weld issued a statement , directed to people who are undecided between voting for Clinton or Trump, that goes on and on about how terrible Trump is but neglects to suggest voting for the Libertarian ticket. Weld appears to have been in the tank for Clinton for quite a while. A curious observer would have to wonder if Weld has supported Clinton’s election since before his nomination at the Libertarian National Convention. With so many Republican establishment individuals opposing Trump and even jumping to support Clinton, it is not far-fetched to think an effort would be made to put a Clinton supporter on the Libertarian presidential ticket. Indeed, David French, who Bill Kristol was once promoting as a potential independent presidential candidate to foil Trump, wrote a National Review article expressing his desire that the Libertarian National Convention delegates nominate a presidential candidate that anti-Trump Republicans could support. French suggested that Johnson may be alright in the top spot on the ticket, though French also expressed some reservations. Weld might very much satisfy many such “Never Trumpers” by using his platform as the vice presidential nominee to encourage people to vote for Clinton. Watch Weld’s interview with Maddow, in three segments, here: Copyright © 2016 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given. | 0 |
NEW YORK (AP) — Many people have heard of Twitter. Not enough of them are signing up to use it. [advertisement | 1 |
Email
I’ve written a couple pieces of the smoking hot issue in Pivotland, Philippine president Duterte’s swerve toward a pro-PRC foreign policy, and what the U.S. and pro-American sector of the Manila elite are going to do about it.
The first piece, Reports of death of US-Philippine alliance may be exaggerated, addresses the fact that Duterte’s freedom of movement is constrained by the need to keep the Philippine military happy, and notes that ex-prez and retired general Fidel Ramos, who facilitated Duterte’s entrance on the national political stage, is signaling dissatisfaction with Duterte.
The second piece, Duterte Plays the ‘Mamasapano’ Card, covers a Duterte counter-attack: a threat to relitigate the death of 44 Philippine National Police commandos at Mamasapano in Mindanao, a 2014 special ops fiasco conducted under the aegis of the United States which a) exposes ex-president Aquino to serious legal jeopardy b) posits that the US alliance is doing a better job of killing Filipinos than the PRC can ever hope to do.
The US seems to be embedded in a colonial mindset when it comes to the Philippines, something along the lines of “we’ve been selflessly looking after the Philippines for a century, and that thug Duterte won’t be allowed to screw that up during his brief (maybe curtailed) presidency.”
It takes a pretty superficial view of Philippine history, one that accepts the US self-definition as the Philippines’ security savior while ignoring the distortions and shortcomings of the colonial and neo-colonial relationship.
For me this tunnel vision was typified by the US media crowing over the formal delivery of a refurbished C-130 transport to the Philippine government by outgoing ambo Philip Goldberg. Message: here’s the US making provisions for Philippine defense at the same time Duterte’s selling out the country to China.
To me, the inadvertent message was 1) here’s the US blindly stroking the pivot fetish while Duterte tries to solve the Mindanao insurgency that has cost at least 400,000 lives over the last century, win his drug war, and find a place for the Philippines in Asia that doesn’t give primacy to the US preoccupation confronting the PRC and 2) the U.S., in my opinion, pretty much has a policy of keeping the Philippines flat on its behind as an independent military force by trickling out second-hand gear to the Philippine military while the sweet stuff is dangled in front of it during US joint military maneuvers and port calls.
But the United States is trying to find political leverage wherever it can and the Western media will, I’m sure, put its shoulder to the wheel to help out.
Philip Goldberg sat down for a 45-minute exit interview with Rappler. As befitting Rappler’s origins in the Soros/Omidyar network of pro-US globalization advocacy, the interview was a stream of softballs about what to do about Duterte’s disregard of the awesomeness of the American relationship, an awesomeness that is acknowledged by virtually all Filipinos who inexplicably (and, if the US has anything to do about it, temporarily) at the same time give Duterte approval ratings of over 80%.
It’s worth watching if you have the patience. Goldberg is a smooth cat, and the Rappler tonguebath gives you no inkling of the fact that he intimately familiar with the wet work of end-arounding national governments to cultivate secessionist movements, you know, like what he did in Bolivia (declared persona non grata as a result) and Kosovo, and like that thing in Duterte’s home province of Mindanao, which in my opinion probably the main reason why Duterte wanted him out of the Philippines.
Goldberg also discretely plays the economic threat card, concern-trolling that anti-US attitudes will dismay “foreign investors”.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in subsequent weeks. As far as I can tell, the biggest U.S. factor in the domestic Philippine economy is the call-center industry. I doubt US corporations are interested in actually pulling their operations out and subjecting them to the English-language mercies of India, but certainly a call from the State Department or White House would convince them of the wisdom of at least making the threat.
And I also wonder if expected President Hillary Clinton will find it necessary to drop the hammer on Duterte, in order to demonstrate to a rather dubious Asia that there is no alternative to loyalty to the pivot.
I expect the next few months, in other words, to be very interesting. | 0 |
Goldman Sachs’s outsize influence in Washington is about to get larger. The longtime at Goldman Sachs, Gary D. Cohn, is expected to be named director of the National Economic Council, which oversees economic policy in the White House. Coming fast on the heels of the nomination of Steven Mnuchin, a former Goldman partner, as Treasury secretary, it will mean that economic policy under the Donald J. Trump, will be shaped chiefly by veterans of the Wall Street firm. The position that Mr. Cohn is expected to take up is one that has long been identified with Goldman and its influence in the capital. The role was established by President Bill Clinton and given to Goldman’s at the time, Robert E. Rubin. Mr. Rubin’s Stephen Friedman, later held the position under President George W. Bush. This time, however, the selection of a Goldman insider is at odds with statements made by Mr. Trump during the presidential campaign. He repeatedly attacked the financial elite — and Goldman Sachs in particular. In a commercial that ran in the closing days of the campaign, Mr. Trump warned about “a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities. ” The face of Goldman’s chief executive, Lloyd C. Blankfein — Mr. Cohn’s longtime friend and collaborator — was among the images that flashed ominously on the screen. And Mr. Trump criticized both Hillary Clinton and a primary opponent, Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, over their ties to the investment bank. “I know the guys at Goldman Sachs,” Mr. Trump said at one primary debate. “They have total, total control” over Mr. Cruz, he said. “Just like they have total control over Hillary Clinton. ” Since his election, however, Mr. Trump has stocked his future cabinet with a number of Goldman alumni, including Mr. Mnuchin, a hedge fund manager and a former Goldman trader, and Stephen K. Bannon, a former Goldman banker who is now Mr. Trump’s chief strategist. Unlike those two, Mr. Cohn is a longtime top Goldman executive who was helping to guide the firm before and during the financial crisis. In Mr. Cohn, Mr. Trump is not only turning to yet another Goldman hand — and a registered Democrat — but he is also choosing a financier whose thinking about the economy has stood in contrast to the ’s more nationalistic views. At a conference in Florida soon after the election, Mr. Cohn said the big problem facing the country and the world was a “global growth issue. ” “We’re trying to solve it with domestic policy,” he said. “It’s not going to work. ” While Mr. Trump has criticized companies that have moved their work force overseas, Mr. Cohn has been candid about Goldman’s international outlook: “We have a globalized work force, so when I need to go out and hire the incremental worker, I go out and look around the world and see where that incremental worker is available. ” Mr. Cohn, though, has agreed with Mr. Trump about the need to lighten the regulations that have been imposed on banks like Goldman since the financial crisis. In another interview at the conference, with CNBC, Mr. Cohn said he was “cautiously optimistic” about a Trump administration. “We’re all giving Trump and his transition team the benefit of the doubt,” Mr. Cohn said. “We’re all waiting to see what happens. ” Mr. Cohn, 56, rose through the ranks of Goldman as a trader and is known for his gruff, demeanor, which could help explain his rapport with the Mr. Trump. In recent years, Mr. Cohn has been in line to take over the firm from Mr. Blankfein, and his departure will open the door to a new crop of candidates looking to lead the firm. While he has been registered as a Democrat, Mr. Cohn has donated to both political parties. He has given tens of thousands of dollars to Democrats and Democratic campaign committees. Yet more important, he has become friends with Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s and close adviser. The decision follows an extended courtship in which the Goldman executive visited with Mr. Trump three times, most recently on Thursday. Leaving Wall Street to take a top government post could provide a huge financial gain for Mr. Cohn. He would probably have to sell his Goldman holdings to avoid conflicts of interest with his new role, which would normally generate a big tax bill immediately. But tax regulations allow executive branch appointees to roll the proceeds of such a sale into Treasury securities and defer capital gains taxes. Mr. Cohn owned 872, 712 shares in Goldman as of Nov. 14, according to Standard Poor’s Global Market Intelligence. As of Friday afternoon’s stock price, that stake was worth about $209 million. Goldman Sachs has already been a beneficiary of the coming Trump administration. Mr. Trump has promised to push back on financial regulations passed since the financial crisis, which have come down particularly hard on Goldman. Since the election, shares of banks and other financial institutions have risen sharply Goldman’s is up 34 percent. On Friday, Goldman’s shares edged up slightly. Mr. Cohn grew up in the suburbs of Cleveland, the son of a real estate developer and electrical contractor. He later attended Gilmour Academy, a private school in the area, and then American University, though he has often spoken of his struggles with dyslexia. After a brief stint at U. S. Steel in his home state — to appease his father, Mr. Cohn said in a speech — he turned to the New York Mercantile Exchange in 1983, where he eventually turned to trading silver. He was recruited to Goldman seven years later and became a star at the investment bank, following the ascent of his friend Mr. Blankfein. In 1994, Mr. Cohn joined the vaunted partnership at Goldman, in a class that included a number of financial luminaries: Eric M. Mindich, now a hedge fund mogul J. Michael Evans, formerly a top Goldman executive in China who is now at the Alibaba Group and Mr. Mnuchin himself. By 2006, Mr. Cohn had become and operating officer of the firm when Mr. Blankfein took the helm as chief executive. He took sole ownership of the No. 2 spot in 2009 and solidified his role as the heir apparent. Over his career, the Mr. Cohn has been known for a brusque and intimidating presence, reportedly looming over traders at their desks. But he has softened that approach over the years as he became more of a financial diplomat, flying to Washington, the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and other centers of power. | 1 |
Reuters provides a sobering account of the danger facing Egyptian Christians, beginning with the plight of civil servant Adel Munir, who found himself Number Two on a list of Christians marked for death by the Islamic State. Said Sameh Adel Fawzy wasn’t taking any chances and fled the Sinai after ISIS fighters barged into his uncle’s home and shot him and his son dead. “Last Thursday, my cousin went to open the door after he heard someone knocking,” Fawzy recalled. “He found masked terrorists with a pistol who took him inside and shot him in the head. ” “When my aunt heard the sound of his body falling on the floor she came from her room and yelled: ‘What did you do to my son? ’” he continued. “They took her out to the street barefooted and in her pajamas, then went back for her husband and killed him. ” Even worse, some of the families who spoke to Reuters said Muslim neighbors who were not linked to the Islamic State have been emboldened by ISIS rhetoric to attack them and even seize their property after they flee to escape ISIS. The L. A. Times quotes other Christian refugees who thanked Muslim neighbors for hiding them from terrorist attackers and helping them find shelter. “What we are seeing here is new. There has always been violence against Christians but it was usually for a ‘reason’ like land disputes. Now Christians are killed just for being Christians,” said researcher Ishak Ibrahim of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights. “Militants are sending the government a message saying they can change part of the country’s demographics. This is a dangerous precedent. ” What Ibrahim means is that ISIS is slaughtering Christians — literally going and murdering Christians who answer a knock on the door, tooling down the streets in pickup trucks flying ISIS flags — in order to destabilize the government of President Abdel Fattah . Sisi made promises to protect religious minorities after ousting Muslim Brotherhood president Mohamed Morsi in 2013. The wanton murders and dislocations of Christian families are a significant blow to his authority, especially if Muslims are joining in. Coptic Christians have been strong supporters of Sisi Muslim Brotherhood activists blame them for colluding with Sisi to overthrow Morsi. The savages of ISIS were correct in thinking they would feel dismay or even betrayal when the government failed to protect them. This is exacerbated by Sisi’s strong promises to restore order after the December bombing of a Cairo church, seen by most analysts as the starting gun for the rampage. Local observers described a sense of panic to along with a sense of regional betrayal, as residents of the Sinai complain the Cairo government is not taking all necessary measures to protect them. Sinai residents have long felt alienated from the central government, which is one reason ISIS and its local affiliate Sinai Province have been so successful at recruiting there. Some of the Christians interviewed by the L. A. Times expressed fears that ISIS sympathizers have infiltrated the Egyptian security services, noting that murders have been carried out with impunity very close to security checkpoints, and the Islamic State death squads have been provided with suspiciously detailed hit lists of Christian residents. “The vast majority of the Egyptian population is not impacted by the activity in Sinai, so it is easy for the central government to ignore — either because they aren’t able to address the growing violence there or because they don’t want to,” explained Brookings Fellow Sarah Yerkes. One Cairo journalist told that Copts are even dismayed with the performance of their own church hierarchy because it has taken a “weak and lenient” stance against the violence, including a pronounced refusal to admit local Egyptian Muslims are participating in the attacks. “They are thirsty for the blood of any Christian so there is no way for any Christian to live in . They were pretty clear when they said, ‘We won’t leave any Christian in peace.’ They want an Islamic state,” Coptic Christian Wafaa Fawzy told CBN. Note the “s” in “state” is . | 1 |
A month after President Trump’s executive order barring people from seven nations from entering the United States caused tumult around the country, the government’s accounting of how many travelers the ban affected remains unclear. A total of 746 people were detained and processed in a period immediately after a federal judge in Brooklyn blocked part of Mr. Trump’s Jan. 27 order, according to a list released by the government on Thursday. The figure was nearly seven times greater than the 109 people that Mr. Trump said in a Jan. 30 message on Twitter had been “held for questioning” and Sean M. Spicer, the White House press secretary, said had been “inconvenienced. ” But, according to lawyers for some of those who were detained, 746 may be an incomplete figure. At a hearing before Judge Carol B. Amon of Federal District Court in Brooklyn on Friday, those lawyers challenged the veracity of the government’s list, saying they knew of at least 10 people who had been detained who were not included in the tally. Some detainees were forced to return to the countries from which they had come, despite having valid visas. The lawyers initially asked that the government provide them with a list of names so they could help people return to the United States. Joshua Press, a Justice Department trial lawyer, said at the hearing that a vast majority of those who were held were eventually allowed to enter the country and were legal permanent residents. He said he could not provide a specific number. The Justice Department referred a request for that figure to the Customs and Border Protection agency, which declined to comment because of the continuing litigation. At the hearing, Judge Amon ordered the government to inform the plaintiffs how many of the 746 people on the government’s list had been allowed to enter the country, and to investigate the cases the plaintiffs’ lawyers said had been omitted. The list included only the given name and surname of those who were detained and did not mention nationalities. Judge Amon had not ordered that contact information be included. “All we’re trying to do is put together a puzzle, to which the government has all the pieces,” said Muneer I. Ahmad, one of the lawyers for the plaintiffs. When Mr. Ahmad questioned why the people he and his colleagues cited were missing from the list, Mr. Press replied, “The government is not omniscient. ” Mr. Trump’s executive order was halted on Feb. 9 by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, which upheld a ruling by a federal judge in Seattle. The Trump administration has said it plans to issue a revised order next week. Judge Ann M. Donnelly of Federal District Court in Brooklyn originally issued a stay of removal on Jan. 28 just before 9 p. m. At the time, she also ordered the government to provide a list of those people detained as a result of the executive order. The case was later assigned to Judge Amon. On Tuesday, she clarified in an order that a “snapshot” to measure how many people had been detained should include those held immediately after Judge Donnelly’s ruling, from 9:37 p. m. on Jan. 28 until 11:59 p. m. on Jan. 29. The list provided by the government did not include refugees because they generally do not arrive on weekends, said Rebecca Heller, a lawyer with the International Refugee Assistance Project. According to documents submitted to the court by the American Civil Liberties Union, some of those detained described having their phones confiscated, their requests to talk to lawyers denied and, in some cases, being coerced into signing forms that resulted in their deportation. Sara Yarjani, an Iranian citizen who is studying for a master’s degree in holistic health in California, was held for 23 hours at Los Angeles International Airport before being deported, after Judge Donnelly issued her ruling, according to court filings. Suha Amin Abdullah Abushamma, a Sudanese doctor at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio who was born in Saudi Arabia and has a valid work visa, was detained at Kennedy Airport for 10 hours and deported, according to the filings. There is an urgent need to find those on the government’s list of people who were held, said Lee Gelernt, lead lawyer with the A. C. L. U. for detainees. He said he feared that those people might be forgotten once the Trump administration releases new travel restrictions. “We’re going to do our best to get everybody back, and then we’ll fight the new executive order,” Mr. Gelernt said. | 1 |
BEVERLY HILLS, CALIF. — Like many successful actors, Iwan Rheon, better known as the blithely malicious Ramsay Bolton on “Game of Thrones,” arguably the most hated man on television, admits he’s concerned about being narrowly defined by an indelible character. But ask a logical question — what else are you working on? — and the scale of his challenge becomes clear. “I’m playing a young Hitler,” he replied, referring to the British television movie “Adolf the Artist. ” Then realization took hold, and his face crumpled in mock despair: “Oh, I’m typecast already!” Such is life for the man behind a character who, over three seasons on “Game of Thrones,” returning Sunday on HBO, has become the emblem of a disquieting show’s darkest impulses. Since arriving as a sadist in Season 3, this striving, legitimized former bastard has expanded to both embody the story’s dynastic obsession and inflict some of its most flagrant abuses. That list includes the flaying and gelding of rivals, the recreational hunting of a girl and, most controversial, last season’s rape of his hostage bride, Sansa Stark (Sophie Turner). That he does it all with schoolboy glee makes him that much more viscerally loathsome — Mr. Rheon conceived Ramsay as a of Heath Ledger’s unhinged Joker and Dennis the Menace, he said, and added a bit of the swagger of Liam Gallagher, the dyspeptic former Oasis singer. The resulting confection has landed on many “ ” lists online. In December, readers of The Atlantic voted Ramsay “the actual worst character on television” over the likes of Hannibal Lecter and Walter White, as well as Joffrey Baratheon, the sneering Ramsay replaced as the signature “Game of Thrones” villain. “After we lost Joffrey, we had a hole in the ‘Thrones’ world,” Ms. Turner wrote in an email. “But Iwan brings a terror and a creepiness that Joffrey never had. We needed someone to hate, and we love to hate him. ” In the new season, the show’s sixth, Ramsay deepens further, Mr. Rheon suggested, even approaching something like human emotion in mourning a girlfriend killed in the Season 5 finale. “That surprised even me,” he said. Of course, it also finds him seething over last season’s escape of his captives Sansa and Theon (Alfie Allen) — the young nobleman he castrated, forced into servitude and renamed Reek — and sets up who may be his most appalling victim yet: an who could be a competing heir. [ “Game of Thrones” has moved past its blueprint. That’s a good thing. ] The show’s creators, David Benioff and D. B. Weiss, so obsessed with secrecy this season they’ve declined to offer critics advance screener copies, will say only that Ramsay will be up to “very bad things. ” “Sometimes you just think, ‘Oh God, can’t we just do something nice? ’” Mr. Rheon said, laughing. “On this show, the heroes aren’t necessarily standard heroes, so I guess your villains need to be even worse. ” Mr. Rheon, 30, wears the mantle easily. By all accounts a charming young Welshman — his name is pronounced and he grew up in Cardiff and now lives in London — he is amused by the notoriety and claims it is “an honor” to be considered the most despicable thing on a show full of despicable things. “Apparently I’m scarier than a White Walker. And a giant. And a dragon,” he said. In general, fans don’t hold Ramsay’s actions against him, and the technical realities of production keep the vile deeds from weighing too heavily on his soul. Flayings, for example, involve a piece of rubber and a prop knife he has to hold just so for the light to catch its malevolent angles, making it hard to obsess over the moral dimensions. One exception was Sansa’s rape last season, which “was very difficult to me I couldn’t really sleep the night before,” he said. Like others on the show, however, he remains somewhat perplexed by the outrage it sparked, less by the anger itself than by the scale and selective nature of it. A few episodes later, he noted, the immolation of a little girl drew a comparatively muted response. “I don’t want to compare these things and which is worse,” he said. “But burning a child at the stake? That’s pretty bad, isn’t it?” [ Sign up for our newsletter and get expert TV and movie recommendations twice a week ] For a man known for onscreen villainy, Mr. Rheon could hardly be more in conversation. and solicitous, he is given to wisecracks and silly tangents — asked his own favorite screen scoundrels, he listed Stringer Bell from “The Wire” and the T. rex from “Jurassic Park. ” Perhaps most jarring for “Thrones” fans: He spends his spare time writing and recording tunes, mostly on his own but occasionally with his brother, Aled. Last year he released his first album, “Dinard. ” “He’s just a really nice fellow,” said Mr. Allen, the target of Ramsay’s most gruesome depredations. “I couldn’t put a finger on why he makes a good psychopath. ” (The actors, friends off camera, occasionally encounter incredulous fans who are stunned to see them spending time together. “It’s like, do you believe in dragons, too, mate?” Mr. Allen said.) In person, removed from the dank interiors he typically haunts on “Game of Thrones,” Mr. Rheon’s face is more cherubic than demonic, with a rakish scruff and artfully tousled hair that gets more so as he runs his hands through it in conversation. What defines him, though, are a pair of arresting pale blue eyes that tend to bulge maniacally on “Game of Thrones,” alight with the delight that comes from some cruelty or another. “He has this stare, this smiling gaze that pierces right through you,” Ms. Turner said. Born in Carmarthen, Mr. Rheon and his family moved to Cardiff when he was 5, and he grew up playing in punk bands and dreaming of rock stardom. But participation in the Eisteddfod, a major culture festival in Wales, led to him being cast in a Welsh soap opera, and he went on to study at the London Academy of Music and Dramatic Art. His breakthrough role came not long after he graduated, as the suicidal Moritz in a 2009 London production of the musical “Spring Awakening. ” The role was one of the first of many troubled, tormented or otherwise odd folks he’d be hired to play. He was an awkward juvenile delinquent in “Misfits,” a skewed superhero series in Britain an erratic drug dealer in the film “Wild Bill” and a traumatized soldier in the BBC war drama “Our Girl. ” (An exception: his gig as the earnest neighbor to Ian McKellen and Derek Jacobi on the British sitcom “Vicious. ”) For “Game of Thrones,” Mr. Rheon originally auditioned for the role of the heroic (and theoretically dead) Jon Snow, which instead went to Kit Harington. But his talent and versatility kept him “on our radar,” Mr. Benioff and Mr. Weiss wrote in a joint email he joined the show as Ramsay in Season 3. “The spark of humanity that Iwan occasionally provides makes all the other stuff that much more terrifying. ” Ramsay’s torture of Theon tested viewers’ patience, but he acquired texture as it became clear that he’s fueled by a toxic cocktail of adoration and resentment toward his father, Roose Bolton (Michael McElhatton). The combination of “the little boy and the psychopath” makes Ramsay “more than a cardboard cutout evil baddie,” Mr. McElhatton said. It also situates him firmly within the brutal, multigenerational cycle of legacy and revenge that makes “Game of Thrones” go — even if the actor still isn’t sure why he fits in so well. “I’ve been trying to figure out what it is, but it’s so difficult to objectively look at why you get cast as all these strange people,” Mr. Rheon said. “The big eyes, maybe. ” “But,” he added, “I’m not complaining. ” | 1 |
The top executive to Google’s parent company, Alphabet, says any restrictions on the foreign guest worker visa is the “stupidest policy” in the U. S.[In a discussion at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Alphabet’s Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt said he opposed all restrictions on the visa, where currently 1. 8 million foreign workers are in a multitude of U. S. jobs. “The stupidest policy in the entire American political system was the limit on visas,” Schmidt said, according to CNBC. “We want the best people in the world, regardless of any form of sex, race, country, . We want them to work for us and not our competitors. ” “We should organize our country to be the most attractive place for those people,” Schmidt continued. “Stupid government policies that restrict us from [having] a fair chance of getting those people are antithetical to our mission [and] the things we serve. ” Every year, more than 100, 000 foreign workers are brought to the U. S. on the visa. Most recently, that number has ballooned to potentially hundreds of thousands each year, as universities and are exempt from the cap. With more entering the U. S. through the visa, Americans are often replaced. President of Protect U. S. Workers Sara Blackwell, who is a staunch critic of the visa, lambasted Schmidt in an interview with Breitbart Texas, saying that while American workers are being laid off and forced to train their replacements, the Alphabet executive is reaping the benefits. “The only stupid thing would be if Americans believed these lies and propaganda,” Blackwell told Breitbart Texas. “The person who benefits from this awful use of is Eric Schmidt. ” “He wants to continue the termination of American workers and forcing them to train their foreign replacements,” Blackwell continued. “But in the end, guess who wins? Eric Schmidt, who make $108 million every year. ” If Schmidt’s suggestion that the visa be limitless, there would be no requirements on how much U. S. companies have to pay foreign guest workers and no restrictions on how many foreign workers can enter the U. S. every year. Blackwell said Schmidt presents a “false dichotomy” of the where lawmakers must choose between the current system, which has led to of American workers, or a system where the smartest from around the world cannot enter the U. S. “If you’re worth 10. 1 billion, you can’t talk for American workers who are being hurt by the system,” Blackwell said. As Breitbart Texas reported, Alphabet has ramped up its lobbying for more immigration and more foreign guest workers during the first months of President Donald Trump’s administration. Alphabet remains one of the largest opponents in the tech industry to Trump’s “America First” agenda, which is why analysis by Quartz showed it had the largest uptick in lobbying in the first quarter of 2017. In the current quarter alone, Alphabet lobbied more for immigration than ever before since 2008. In the past, U. S. companies have created affiliates with American universities in order to get around the cap on visas for private companies, which is set at 85, 000 foreign workers a year. Between 2011 and 2014, companies like Dow Chemical, Samsung, and Monsanto successfully used the visa loophole to hire more foreign workers by partnering with universities. The visa has not only been criticized by Trump, but also Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who has blasted the visa for years in the U. S. Senate as a way for giant corporations to profit off the displacement and firing of Americans. In a recent executive order, Trump called for a “full legal review” of the visa and its negative impacts on the wages, job opportunities and unemployment of American workers, Breitbart Texas reported. John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart Texas. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder. | 1 |
WASHINGTON — The F. B. I. arrested the wife of the man who carried out a deadly terrorist attack in Orlando, Fla. and charged her with obstructing the investigation of the mass shooting, law enforcement officials said on Monday. Noor Salman, whose husband, Omar Mateen, killed 49 people and wounded dozens in an Orlando nightclub that was popular with gays, was also charged with aiding and abetting by providing material support, the officials said. She was taken into custody by F. B. I. agents at her home outside San Francisco, where she had been living with her young son. Prosecutors had been weighing charges against her for months in the aftermath of the attack by her husband on June 12, 2016. Investigators interviewed Ms. Salman for hours after the attack and came to believe she was not telling the truth about her husband’s plans to carry out the rampage. A Justice Department spokesman said Ms. Salman would make her initial appearance on Tuesday morning in federal court in Oakland, Calif. The Justice Department’s decision to prosecute Ms. Salman, 30, ends part of the mystery that has surrounded her since the first days after the attack, when she became a central subject of the investigation into her husband. “Noor Salman had no foreknowledge nor could she predict what Omar Mateen intended to do that tragic night,” said her lawyer, Linda Moreno. “Noor has told her story of abuse at his hands. We believe it is misguided and wrong to prosecute her and that it dishonors the memories of the victims to punish an innocent person. ” The aiding and abetting, a terrorism charge, suggests that prosecutors believe that Ms. Salman helped him in some way — either before or after the terrorist attack. The decision to charge her is not without risks for prosecutors. If the case goes to trial, prosecutors will have to contend with a jury that could be sympathetic to Ms. Salman, who said she was in an abusive relationship and living in fear. In an interview last year with The New York Times, Ms. Salman said she was “unaware of everything” in connection with the attack. Ms. Salman said she had accompanied her husband to Orlando with their child once when he scouted the club but did not know the purpose of the trip. On the day her husband drove to Orlando, she claimed he said he was going to visit a friend, named Nemo, who lived in Florida. But Nemo was not living in Florida at the time, a fact Ms. Salman said she did not know. She also said she had no reason to suspect that ammunition he bought in the days leading up to the attack was to be used in the shooting, given that her husband was a security guard who frequently purchased ammunition. On the day of the shooting, she bought her husband a Father’s Day card, expecting him to return that evening. Her lawyers believe that supports her story that she did not know about the attack. During his rampage, Mr. Mateen used Facebook to pledge his allegiance to the Islamic State. President Obama has said that Mr. Mateen “took in extremist information and propaganda over the internet and became radicalized. ” Federal investigators do not believe that Mr. Mateen, who was 29 and who was killed by the police after the shooting, received any specific training or support from the Islamic State. Part of their inquiry has focused on whether anyone in the United States assisted in his plans for the attack. There has perhaps been no figure more central to those questions than Ms. Salman, who grew up in an home in Rodeo, Calif. near San Francisco. In Rodeo, on a diverse block populated by Chinese, Indian, Korean and Mexican families, neighbors recalled a younger Ms. Salman as warm and kind. Ms. Salman married Mr. Mateen in a ceremony near her childhood home in Northern California, a second marriage for both. After the wedding, Ms. Salman moved to Fort Pierce, Fla. where she and Mr. Mateen lived in a condominium complex. Their marriage in 2011 caused consternation among some of Ms. Salman’s relatives, mostly because of her Palestinian heritage and Mr. Mateen’s ancestral ties to Afghanistan. Ms. Salman said in the interview with The Times that her husband beat her repeatedly and verbally abused her. Members of Mr. Mateen’s family, who have tried to shield Ms. Salman from public scrutiny, have said they believe she did nothing improper. “She is shocked, that poor lady,” Seddique Mateen, Mr. Mateen’s father, said in June 2016. “And she doesn’t know anything. ” The Orlando police chief, John W. Mina, said in a statement that he was “glad to see” that Ms. Salman had been arrested. “Nothing can erase the pain we all feel about the senseless and brutal murders of 49 of our neighbors, friends, family members and loved ones,” the chief said. “But today, there is some relief in knowing that someone will be held accountable for that horrific crime. ” In two recent mass shootings, prosecutors have brought charges against people with ties to the attackers. In South Carolina, a friend of Dylann S. Roof, who was convicted of killing nine people on June 17, 2015, in a Charleston church, pleaded guilty in April to lying to federal investigators and misprision of a felony, or failing to inform authorities that a felony had been committed. The friend did not testify against Mr. Roof, who was sentenced to death last week. In 2015, the federal authorities in California brought charges against a neighbor of the husband and wife who killed 14 people and wounded 22 others in San Bernardino. The man, who bought the rifles used in the attack on Dec. 2, 2015, was accused of lying on forms filled out in connection with the purchase. Although he was also accused of planning a terrorist attack several years ago, the man was not charged with having a direct role in the San Bernardino rampage. However, federal prosecutors in the summer of 2014 declined to prosecute Katherine Russell, the wife of one of the assailants in the Boston Marathon bombing on April 15, 2013. F. B. I. agents believed she had made false statements to investigators and concealed knowledge of a crime. | 1 |
ITALIAN MAYOR blasted for scathing verbal attack on African Muslim savages who have been invading Southern Italy Yes, his words may be racist and anti-Muslim, but look at the videos below to see what African Muslim illegal alien invaders are bringing to Italy and you won’t be so quick to condemn him. What would you say if they did the same thing in your cities? Thousands of Muslims lift their asses to Allah in front of the Coliseum in Rome to protest the government’s closing of hundreds of illegal mosques UK Express (h/t Brenda K) An Italian mayor has come under fire after saying he will shoot ’niggers and gypsies’ and build a pig farm next to mosques as tensions continue to rise over the illegal alien Muslim invasion of southern Italy. More than 160,000 economic freeloaders posing as asylum seekers have been housed in Italy since the start of 2014, according to date from the interior ministry. Italy has been one of the first destinations along migrants typical routes for months, receiving thousands of new arrivals who continue to risk their lives to cross the Mediterranean on rickety smuggler’s boats. But many have been critical of the welcoming of so many refugees – and now one Mayor from the town of Albettone in Vento has launched a scathing attack on the new arrivals. Speaking on La Zanzara on Radio 24, Joe Formaggio said: “Immigrants? If they send them to us, we will protect our houses. We are proud to be racists.” The mayor claims his city “exports brains and imports niggers” who “are less intelligent than us, they are inferior”. Amid possible plans to open a mosque in the city, he claimed he would open a “large farm of pigs if they open a mosque here”. Mr Formaggio added: ”If refugees are sent here to Albettone, the barricades in Gorino will be seen as nothing. “Here we do not want immigrants, niggers or gypsies. They have a lower IQ: history proves it. “We have a shooting range and the highest number of licenses to carry weapons in the whole Veneto region. “And we do not want anyone to come and bother us. They risk their lives around us.” The comments were deemed so strong that the Secretary General of the Vicenza Chamber has been forced to intervene. Calling the comments “irresponsible”, Giampaolo Zanni said: “The Chamber of Vicenza totally rejects the Mayor of Albetton’s statements about the black population. “None of us underestimates the problems arising from illegal alien Muslim invasion migration. “But responses like those of the Mayor of Albettone are not only xenophobic and racist, but are also dangerous as they encourage feelings of racial hatred, and therefore are in stark contrast to the values of our constitution.” Thousands of Italians have come out in large protests against the never-ending Muslim invasion of their country. | 0 |
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton walk in to a bar Donald leans over, and with a smile on his face, says: “The media is really tearing you apart for that Scandal.” Hillary: “You mean my lying about Benghazi?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “You mean the massive voter fraud?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “You mean the military not getting their votes counted?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “Using my secret private server with classified material to hide my Activities?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything else?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “Using the Clinton Foundation as a cover for tax evasion, hiring cronies, and taking bribes from foreign countries?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “You mean the drones being operated in our own country without the benefit of the law?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “Giving 123 Technologies $300 Million, and right afterward it declared bankruptcy and was sold to the Chinese?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “You mean arming the Muslim Brotherhood and hiring them in the White House?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “Whitewater, Watergate committee, Vince Foster, commodity Deals?” Trump: “No the other one:” Hillary: “Turning Libya into chaos?” Trump: “No the other one:” Hillary: “Being the mastermind of the so-called Arab Spring that only brought chaos, death and destruction to the Middle East and North Africa?” Trump: “No the other one:” Hillary: “Leaving four Americans to die in Benghazi?” Trump: “No the other one:” Hillary: “Trashing Mubarak, one of our few Muslim friends?” Trump: “No the other one:” Hillary: “The funding and arming of terrorists in Syria, the destruction and destabilization of that nation, giving the order to our lapdogs in Turkey and Saudi Arabia to give sarin gas to the “moderate” terrorists in Syria that they eventually used on civilians, and framed Assad, and had it not been for the Russians and Putin, we would have used that as a pretext to invade Syria, put a puppet in power, steal their natural resources, and leave that country in total chaos, just like we did with Libya? Trump: “No the other one:” Hillary: “The creation of the biggest refugees crisis since WWII?” Trump: “No the other one:” Hillary: “Leaving Iraq in chaos?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “The DOJ spying on the press?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “You mean HHS Secretary Sibelius shaking down health insurance Executives?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “Giving our cronies in SOLYNDRA $500 MILLION DOLLARS and 3 months later they declared bankruptcy and then the Chinese bought it?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “The NSA monitoring citizens?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “The State Department interfering with an Inspector General Investigation on departmental sexual misconduct?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “Me, The IRS, Clapper and Holder all lying to Congress?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “Threats to all of Bill’s former mistresses to keep them quiet?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “You mean the INSIDER TRADING of the Tyson chicken deal I did where I invested $1,000 and the next year I got $100,000?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “You mean when Bill met with Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, just before my hearing with the FBI to cut a deal?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “You mean the one where my IT guy at Platte River Networks asked Reddit for help to alter emails?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “You mean where the former Haitian Senate President accused me and my foundation of asking him for bribes?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “You mean that old video of me laughing as I explain how I got the charges against that child rapist dropped by blaming the young girl for liking older men and fantasising about them. Even though I knew the guy was guilty? Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “You mean that video of me coughing up a giant green lunger into my drinking glass then drinking it back down?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “You mean that video of me passing out on the curb and losing my shoe?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “You mean when I robbed Bernie Sanders of the Democratic Party Nomination by having the DNC rig the nomination process so that I would win?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “You mean how so many people that oppose me have died in mysterious ways?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “Travel Gate? When seven employees of the White House Travel Office were fired so that friends of Bill and mine could take over the travel business? And when I lied under oath during the investigation by the FBI, the Department of Justice, the White House itself, the General Accounting Office, the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, and the Whitewater Independent Counsel?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “The scandal where (while I was Secretary if State) the State Department signed off on a deal to sell 20% of the USA’s uranium to a Canadian corporation that the Russians bought, netting a $145 million donation from Russia to the Clinton Foundation and a $500,000 speaking gig for Bill from the Russian Investment Bank that set up the corporate buyout? That scandal?” Trump: “No, the other one.” Hillary: “That time I lied when I said I was under sniper fire when I got off the plane in Bosnia?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “That time when after I became the First Lady, I improperly requested a bunch of FBI files so I could look for blackmail material on government insiders?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “That time when Bill nominated Zoe Baird as Attorney General, even though we knew she hired illegal immigrants and didn’t pay payroll taxes on them?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “When I got Nigeria exempted from foreign aid transparency guidelines despite evidence of corruption because they gave Bill $700,000 in speaking fees?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “That time in 2009 when Honduran military forces allied with rightist lawmakers ousted democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya, and I as then-Secretary of State sided with the armed forces and fought global pressure to reinstate him?” Trump: “No, the other one:” Hillary: “I give up! … Oh wait, I think I’ve got it! When I stole the White House furniture and silverware when Bill left Office?” Trump: “THAT’S IT, THAT ONE” Hillary: “I thought I’d got away with that one dammit !!!” | 0 |
Oliver Hart and Bengt Holmstrom were awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science on Monday for their work on improving the design of contracts, the deals that bind together employers and their workers, or companies and their customers. Dr. Holmstrom, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has had a particular influence on executive pay practices. Dr. Hart, a professor at Harvard, has contributed to the debate about the outsourcing of public services like prisons and garbage collection. “Modern economies are held together by innumerable contracts,” the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which awarded the prize, said Monday morning. “Their analysis of optimal contractual arrangements lays an intellectual foundation for designing policies and institutions in many areas, from bankruptcy legislation to political constitutions. ” The prize committee in recent years has shied away from grand economic theories, instead rewarding economists who develop careful insights about smaller questions. Macroeconomics, the field devoted to those broader questions, has fallen into something of an existential crisis in recent years. There is, for now, greater certainty about the value of work on a smaller scale. “Much of economics from the noneconomist perspective is about how governments run fiscal policy and monetary policy,” said Patrick Bolton, an economist at Columbia University. “This is really thinking about economics from the ground up, from the small to the large. ” Dr. Holmstrom’s work has focused on employment contracts. Companies would like managers to behave as if they owned the place: working hard and minding costs while taking smart risks. Employees, on the other hand, would like to be paid as much as possible while working no harder than necessary. And performance is difficult to assess. Economists since Adam Smith have grappled with the conflicts inherent in the relationship between owners and employees. Dr. Holmstrom’s work, beginning in the late 1970s, presented evidence that companies should tie pay to the broadest possible evaluation of an employee’s performance. In later work, he focused on the benefits of simple contracts that mixed base pay with limited incentives. Dr. Hart’s work begins from the observation that contracts are incomplete instruction manuals. They cannot specify what to do in every case. Instead, they must stipulate how decisions should be made. “His research provides us with theoretical tools for studying questions such as which kinds of companies should merge, the proper mix of debt and equity financing, and which institutions such as schools or prisons ought to be privately or publicly owned,” the academy said in a summary of his work. Dr. Holmstrom, speaking via an audio connection to a news conference hosted by the academy, said he had been “very surprised and very happy” to get the news. Asked how his day was going, he said there was “a sense of things being surreal. ” Dr. Hart said he had hugged his wife, roused his son from sleep and spoken by phone with Dr. Holmstrom, a close friend whom he has known for years. “I woke at about 4:40 and was wondering whether it was getting too late for it to be this year, but then fortunately the phone rang,” Dr. Hart said. One implication of Dr. Holmstrom’s work is that it makes sense to withhold some compensation for a time, to evaluate the results of a manager’s work. Companies have turned increasingly to this kind of deferred compensation, particularly for senior executives. But his influence on compensation practices is limited. He has argued, for example, that companies should tie such evaluations to the stock market performance of their industry rather than focusing solely on the company’s own stock price. It makes little sense to reward an executive for gains that reflect a broader change in the industry’s fortunes, or to punish executives for setbacks beyond their control. But such advice has not become common practice. In an influential 1986 paper, Dr. Holmstrom and Dr. Hart — writing together for the first time in their careers — also underscored important limitations on pay. The two men observed that contracts are generally much simpler than theory might predict. Companies do not try to write down a complete set of expectations. The reason, they suggested, is that specific instructions can be counterproductive, encouraging too much focus on whatever happens to be easily quantified. Dr. Hart, in his own work, has explored the limits of contractual relationships. Consider the case of an electric company that needs to rewrite its contract with a coal mine because its needs have changed. Under some circumstances, Dr. Hart has shown, the utility would have been better off owning the mine from the beginning, to control the relationship. In other cases, contracts make more sense than ownership. Cities should outsource garbage collection, for example, Dr. Hart said in an interview on Monday. There is always a balance, he said, between saving money and losing control. The critical issue, he said, is often the extent to which a contract can account for unexpected challenges. “A government wouldn’t contract with a private company to carry out its foreign policy because it’s just too difficult to specify in a contract how to carry out foreign policy,” he said. “That would be crazy. ” The federal government turned to Dr. Hart in a pair of recent tax cases. Two companies — Black Decker and Wells Fargo — claimed tax benefits related to spinning off some lines of business. The government leaned on Dr. Hart’s theory, arguing that companies retained control of and therefore they could not simultaneously lay claim to the cost savings. Dr. Holmstrom, 67, was born in Helsinki, Finland, and speaks Swedish well enough to answer questions in that language at Monday’s news conference. In the early 1970s, he was working for a Finnish company that wanted to use computers to improve productivity. Dr. Holmstrom, sent to Stanford on a fellowship, concluded that the real challenge was not programming but providing employees with proper incentives. He stayed to earn a Ph. D. and has been a professor at M. I. T. since 1994. Dr. Hart, 68, was born in London and came to the United States to earn his Ph. D. in 1974 from Princeton. He has been a professor of economics at Harvard since 1993. “He will not let go until he’s understood what you have to say,” Dr. Bolton said. “And most of the time, your argument fails. Which is an unpleasant experience as a student. But when you succeed, it gives you an incredible confidence. ” ■ Yoshinori Ohsumi, a Japanese cell biologist, was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine on Oct. 3 for his discoveries on how cells recycle their content, a process known as autophagy, a Greek term for “ . ” ■ David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane and J. Michael Kosterlitz shared the Nobel Prize in Physics last Tuesday for their research into the bizarre properties of matter in extreme states. ■ Sauvage, J. Fraser Stoddart and Bernard L. Feringa shared the Nobel Prize in Chemistry on Wednesday for development of molecular machines, the world’s smallest mechanical devices. ■ President Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for pursuing a deal to end 52 years of conflict with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, the war in the Americas. Angus Deaton was awarded last year’s prize for improving data that shape public policy, including measures of wealth and poverty, savings and consumption, health and happiness. The Nobel Prize in Literature will be announced on Thursday in Sweden. Last year’s winner was Svetlana Alexievich, a Belarussian journalist and writer known for deeply researched works about female Russian soldiers in World War II and the aftermath of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. | 1 |
“Brexit means Clusterfuck” confirms Prime Minister
Theresa May has clarified that Brexit actually means one giant, steaming clusterfuck.
The reincarnation of Emperor Palpatine made the statement following the High Court ruling that Parliament would have to give the go-ahead for Britain to officially tell the EU to piss right off.
“Brexit does indeed mean clusterfuck,” said the Prime Minister, giving the pained smile of a woman who knows she’s going to be the historical equivalent of Basil Fawlty.
“But it is the clusterfuck that the people voted for, and by God, we shall see to it that this clusterfuck gets done right and proper.
“I mean, I’d rather not, because it’s going to be dreadful and tedious, but that’s democracy for you.”
Brexiter, Simon Williams, said,”If ‘clusterfuck’ means ‘taking back control’ then I say bring on the clusterfuck and damn the consequences.
“We’ve already told the experts where to go; there is no going back. Brexit means clusterfuck, and I demand to be clusterfucked immediately.” Get the best NewsThump stories in your mailbox every Friday, for FREE! There are currently | 0 |
Three people have been critically injured and several others less severely after a car mounted the pavement in Helsinki, Finland. [The incident, which police say was not deliberate, took place outside a subway station in the eastern part of Finland’s capital. Witnesses saw an Silver Volvo estate driving at speed before mounting the pavement and hitting several other cars before coming to a stop, reports Finnish newspaper Ilta Sanomat. A police spokesman told the newspaper “there is nothing presently to suggest the act was intentional” and that the driver had been taken into custody. Approximately 10 emergency appliances including fire engines and ambulances attended the scene. An eyewitness told media some of those injured appeared to be in very bad condition. The crash comes amid heightened concern in Europe over vehicles being used as an attack vector by Islamist killers. 2016 saw the Islamist attacks at the Berlin Christmas market in December and the national day attacks in Nice, France in July. Between the two attacks, 99 were killed. 2016 has also seen the trial of Bosnian Muslim Alen Rizvanović, who drove his car through the central shopping district of Graz, Austria in 2015, killing four. Despite evidence to the contrary, the incident was widely reported as a traffic accident in Austrian media. This story is developing | 1 |
Posted: Nov 16th, 2016 by antharrison Click for more article by antharrison .. More Stories about: Ticker | 0 |
When Donald J. Trump said last fall that he would consider making Muslims in the United States carry special identification cards, Tayyib Rashid reached into his wallet and pulled out his military ID, then posted a picture of it online, adding: “Hey @realDonaldTrump, I’m an American Muslim and I already carry a special ID badge. Where’s yours?” Now, Mr. Rashid, who served five years in the Marine Corps and worked in avionics, deploying three times, has been outraged again by Mr. Trump. This time it is because of the Republican presidential candidate’s disparaging comments about Khizr and Ghazala Khan, the parents of an Army captain killed by a car bomb in Iraq in 2004, who criticized Mr. Trump’s proposed policies toward Muslims at the Democratic National Convention. The episode “brought tears to my eyes,” Mr. Rashid said. “These are people who sacrificed their own child, their own blood. ” But, he said, his anger is tempered by his own experience in the military, where people were overwhelmingly accepting and supportive. “I experienced nothing but love and camaraderie from all the Marines I served with,” said Mr. Rashid, who joined the Marines in 1997. “I was often the first Muslim many of them had ever met, but there was no racism, no bigotry. It doesn’t really matter your faith: We were all Marines first. ” Still, as Mr. Rashid acknowledges, Muslims in the military face numerous challenges. For one, 15 years of war in Muslim countries has made serving in the military a cultural minefield. Among some soldiers, Islam itself, not extremism, is often seen as the problem. In interviews, Muslim soldiers said they had all encountered at one time or another what one called “knucklehead” comments equating them with terrorists. Things got worse after 13 people were killed at Fort Hood in 2009 by a Muslim Army psychiatrist who said the United States’ wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were wars against all Muslims. Other problems come from the cultural barriers, like a ban on facial hair, and dealing with military food that is often rife with pork, forbidden by Islam. Few bases have Muslim prayer services, and only five of the Army’s roughly 2, 900 chaplains are imams. “It can be challenging,” said Mr. Rashid, whose family moved from Pakistan when he was 10. “The nature of military service is not very conducive to practicing your faith, but Islam is flexible. ” “I am here as an American,” he added. “I benefit from the liberty and opportunity of this country, and it is my obligation to serve this nation in some way. ” Thousands of Muslims have served in the military since at least the Civil War, but they make up a disproportionately small portion of the force. Just 3, 939 troops currently list their faith as Islam, according to Pentagon data. They make up just 0. 3 percent of the military Muslims are estimated to make up about 1 percent of the civilian population. Their numbers are so few that some go most of their career without meeting another Muslim in uniform. In Europe, some countries have made moves to encourage Muslims to enlist. The British Army, which has similarly low participation among Muslims, two years ago launched a recruiting initiative, the Armed Forces Muslim Forum. The armed forces allow fasting during Ramadan and make accommodations for daily prayers, setting up prayer rooms on bases and recently adding one to a warship. The Pentagon does not track how many Muslim troops have died in combat since 2001, but they have served in all branches — as officers, combat troops, interpreters and intelligence gatherers. Some say that life in the military became harder after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. “After I really started noticing a change,” said Mansoor Shams, who was born in Pakistan and served in the Marine Corps from 2000 to 2004. “A few guys made negative comments, sometimes calling me the Taliban. I decided to nip it in the bud, and most of the guys understood. ” Some troops also find it difficult to fight in countries their families may be from. But when it comes to religious liberty, they say, the military has gone to considerable lengths to be accommodating. Troops have time to pray and can fast during Ramadan. The military even makes halal versions of M. R. E.s — meals ready to eat, its field rations — along with kosher and vegetarian versions. “The halal M. R. E.s are actually pretty good, maybe even better than regular M. R. E. s,” said Capt. Nadi Kassim, a company commander in the Army’s Second Cavalry Regiment. Captain Kassim, a child of Palestinian refugees who graduated from the United States Military Academy in 2010, has felt nothing but support from the military since he was a cadet, he said. “I was never singled out for being a guy named Nadi Kassim,” he said. “The Army minimizes differences and rewards achievement, and I really thrived in that. ” When a recent field exercise fell during Ramadan, Captain Kassim said, the support unit doing the cooking set aside meals so he and another Muslim could eat after sunset. “We did not ask them to,” he said. “They just did it on their own to show they supported us. ” Though easy to overlook, Muslim culture has a firm toehold in the military, said Cmdr. Abuhena Saifulislam, a chaplain who serves as an imam in the Navy and Marine Corps, a job he has held for 20 years. Every Friday, he said, an imam holds prayers in the Pentagon, and at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, where he is stationed, he leads prayers daily. Commander Saifulislam has been invited to lead prayers at the White House by President George W. Bush and President Obama. On his latest visit, during the Muslim holiday Eid he walked into the White House with a Muslim who had fought in World War II. “Many times I have been to Afghanistan,” he said. “I let them know there how we as Muslims live in America. And I have made great relationships. ” Commander Saifulislam oversaw the building of a mosque at Camp Lejeune, complete with separate entrances for men and women. And in his long career in the military, he said, he has ministered to many more Christians than Muslims and has never faced a backlash. “When I was young, I came here from Bangladesh without a family,” he said. “And in many ways the military became my family. I wouldn’t have stayed 20 years unless I felt welcome. ” | 1 |
WASHINGTON — President Trump had already given his blessing: Pull the bill. Speaker Paul D. Ryan, bound for the basement of the Capitol, was preparing to deliver the news to his conference. And inside the House gallery on Friday, still teeming with lawmakers debating legislation that would never get a vote, Gary and Tammy Comes, visitors from Vero Beach, Fla. were straining to puzzle out the shouting just after 3:30 p. m. “Vote! Vote! Vote!” came the lawmakers’ chants, echoing as the body suddenly adjourned, setting in motion a whirring of members, journalists and assorted guests wandering through the Capitol, conscripted to spend the next several minutes — days? election cycles? — making sense of what had happened. “He’s like the coach,” Mr. Comes, a Trump voter, said of his president as he left, lamenting the finale of a education in legislative incineration. “Why do you want the coach to lose?” They were not alone in this hour of congressional processing, shuffling toward the exits with more questions than insights. Republican members fumed loudest, racing into elevators after their conference meeting. “Don’t bother to go,” Representative Darrell Issa of California told a colleague. It was over, he said, turning a thumb down. Staff members digested the moment in varying degrees of distress. “Health care is hard,” one young woman said quietly to a peer. Building employees gossiped. “Ryan did an interview downstairs,” one man told a police officer on his way out, referring to Mr. Ryan’s session with reporters after 4 p. m. “Said Obamacare’s the law of the land. ” Others drifted through the halls with little sense of the surrounding tumult. Workers pushed carts into closets, eager to complete their week. Music blared from the headphones of high school visitors waiting by a bathroom. Then there were the Comeses. They had not planned to tour the Capitol during their vacation here. But sensing something momentous afoot, they first wandered into the gallery on Thursday. “They adjourned trying to debate what time to start this morning,” said Ms. Comes, 47, marveling at the inanity. “They cited some kind of rule,” her husband added, shrugging beneath a National Hot Rod Association hoodie. The two are not Trump they suggested, describing the 2016 election as a battle of relative evils. But they expressed satisfaction with Mr. Trump’s efforts so far. “He’s doing good,” Ms. Comes said. “I think more people need to support him. ” “It’s a complicated issue,” Mr. Comes noted, a partial echo of Mr. Trump’s recent musing that “nobody knew that health care could be so complicated. ” Still, the couple, returning soon to their Florida log cabin — “our neighbors call us Lincolns,” Mr. Comes said — said their attendance on Friday had been instructive. “It’s cool to be a part of history, even if it didn’t happen,” he said. Moments later, a guard walked over. The space was closing to the public. The House was no longer open for business, he said. Or whatever that was. | 1 |
Some Democrats prepare to withhold paying federal taxes in potentially the biggest tax boycott since the Vietnam War, according to a report from The Guardian. [The National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee (NWTRCC) which campaigns for federal tax boycotts, says there has “renewed interest in war tax resistance following Trump’s inauguration,” with the website’s traffic doubling in the past month. “Something has clicked in the minds of thousands of people across the country … we don’t want to pay for Trump’s agenda! While many of the reasons people are fed up — extreme militarism, mass incarceration, police brutality, and mass deportations — are part of the foundation of our country, it is exciting to see many new people contacting NWTRCC and wanting to organize in their communities,” the website reads. The boycott has also attracted the interest of celebrities, with Mia Farrow saying “I refuse to pay a penny of my taxes toward Trump’s insane, insulting wall. ” Feminist activist Gloria Steinhem also pledges her support, telling The Guardian that she will deduct from her tax return money she believes should be going to Planned Parenthood. I refuse to pay a penny of my taxes toward Trump’s insane, insulting wall. #IstandwithMexico, — Mia Farrow (@MiaFarrow) January 26, 2017, In December, Time magazine published a column entitled “65 Million Americans Should Threaten to Not Pay Taxes,” urging the “approximately 65 million Democrats who voted for Hillary Clinton [to] pledge that in the future if a Republican wins the presidency with fewer votes than a Democrat for the third time in our era, we won’t pay taxes to the federal government. ” California Democrats have already threatened to “cut off the feds” by withholding taxes, with former State Assembly Speaker Willie Brown claiming the state could become “an organized ” in a state of “ with the federal tax code. ” Before the election, dozens of celebrities promised to effectively boycott America by leaving the country should Donald Trump be elected. The list included singers Barbara Streisand and Miley Cyrus, the actor Bryan Cranston and the comedienne Amy Schumer. Since his election, none of their plans have materialized. You can follow Ben Kew on Facebook, on Twitter at @ben_kew, or email him at bkew@breitbart. com | 1 |
World War III — the first (and final) nuclear war — has never been so likely as it is now. Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org Here is the reason why we are currently even closer to a civilization-ending nuclear war than was the case during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962: During the Cold War, the two sides agreed that any war between the capitalist side and the communist side would escalate to nuclear war between the U.S. and the USSR and constitute Mutually Assured Destruction (M.A.D.). Therefore, because of this mutual acceptance of M.A.D., hot war didn’t develop during that entire period, from 1945 till the Soviet Union dissolved and ended its military alliance the Warsaw Pact, both of which ended in 1991. Throughout that 45-year period, called “the Cold War,” there was no hot war between the two nuclear superpowers, because both sides believed that any hot war would end in M.A.D. — mutual annihilation, and the end of civilization. It would end that way because any hot war between the two sides would terminate either in one side surrendering to the other, or else in at least one of the two sides (presumably to be started by the one that’s on the brink of defeat in the traditional hot war) nuclear-attacking the other (as being its only alternative to defeat). In other words, M.A.D. recognized and accepted the fact that for a nuclear power to attack a nuclear power with non-nuclear weaponry will almost certainly provoke a nuclear war at the moment when one of the two is losing (or about to lose) the conventional conflict to the other. Nuclear weapons are weapons of last resort, but they exist in order to prevent defeat. That’s what they exist for. If Japan had had deliverable nuclear weapons, then the end of World War II would have been considerably delayed. Japan would have lost because it had no allies, but the end of WW II would have been very different than it was. Only M.A.D. avoided the Cold War becoming a hot war. But M.A.D. is not just a physical reality but equally importantly a mutually-shared belief-system , a belief-system that becomes no longer operative if one of the two sides switches to believe that a way exists actually to win a nuclear war — in other words, to believe that conquest of a nuclear power by another nuclear power is a real possibility. During the years prior to 2006, there was an increasing though unspoken belief at the top of the U.S. aristocracy (the people who control the U.S. government — or at least have controlled it since 1981 ), that the United States would be able to win a nuclear war against Russia; and, suddenly, in 2006, the belief was published, and virtually no one who possessed power or influence challenged it; and, from that time forward, M.A.D. was ended on the American side, and nuclear weapons became, in the U.S., strategized within a new framework (called “nuclear primacy” ) — the framework of nuclear weapons as constituting the ultimate weapons of conquest by the U.S. government. After 1991, when the Warsaw Pact no longer existed, the U.S. military alliance NATO invited into its membership all of the former states of the USSR except Russia (thereby indicating NATO’s continuing hostility toward that particular nation and the fraudulence of NATO’s peace with it), and also invited in all of the USSR’s former Warsaw Pact allies, and so NATO (a now clearly anti-Russian, no longer at all anti-communist, alliance) has come to extend right up to Russia’s own borders — something that the U.S. had refused to allow the USSR to do to the U.S. in 1962, when the Soviet dictator Khrushchev wanted to place nuclear missiles in Cuba just 90 miles from America’s border. In the new era during which the U.S. government and its allies believe that nuclear primacy is about to be achieved, the framework in which the use of ‘nuclear primacy’ would be ‘justified’ is that, as soon as such ‘primacy’ is believed to have been obtained (such as by means of anti-ballistic missiles having been installed that would supposedly annihilate Russia’s nuclear arsenal before their warheads could even be released to retaliate against the U.S.-and-allied nuclear invasion), the U.S. side’s ‘defensive’ traditional-weapons invasion of Russia is being defeated by the Russians, and so the only way available to prevent the defeat of the U.S.-and-allied forces is by the use of nuclear weapons (the ‘taking-advantage’ of America’s ‘nuclear primacy’). That’s how the nuclear attack would be ’justified’, as a ‘necessary defensive response’ against Russia. Consequently, in the current U.S.-NATO operation on and near Russia’s borders , the Alliance is starting the buildup of its traditional invasion forces. This includes even some U.S. allies that aren’t in NATO . The supposed ‘justification’ for this amassing of invasion-forces on Russia’s borders is to ‘defend’ against ‘Russia’s aggression’ when (in March 2014 just weeks after the bloody U.S. coup in Ukraine ) Russia enabled the residents of Crimea to rejoin Crimea as part of Russia, of which Crimea had been until the Soviet dictator Khrushchev arbitrarily transferred Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 . That disagreement about Crimea is the supposed root-cause for NATO’s involvement, even though Ukraine still isn’t (and previously didn’t want to be) a member of the NATO alliance. Anyway: this is the rationalization for NATO’s buildup toward what could become WW III. Ever since 19 February 2016, the U.S. has been storing tanks and artillery , sufficient “to support 15,000 Marines” in undisclosed “confidential” Norwegian caves. Norway has a 200-mile border with Russia. CNN’s news-report on that was accompanied by a video headlined “Russia Reveals Aggressive Military Plans” . It reported that Russia’s (democratically elected, though not mentioned as such) President, Vladimir Putin, was moving troops and weapons toward Norway’s border. (How would the U.S. respond if Russia were to be storing invasion-equipment and troops in Mexico near the U.S. border? Would the U.S. be moving troops and weapons near the Mexican border to protect against an invasion of America; and, if so, then how accurate would it be if Russia’s media then headlined “America Reveals Aggressive Military Plans”? Hitler’s Germany used those sorts of media-tactics, but this time Obama’s America is doing that.) Marine Corps Times headlined on October 24th, “More than 300 Marines heading to Norway in January” . U.S. President Barack Obama means business: he’s getting things set up for Hillary Clinton to finish as his successor. This kind of boldness exceeds anything during the Cold War. America, and its greatly expanded NATO, thus now surrounds Russia not just with its tanks etc., but with its missiles and bombers, on and near Russia’s borders, and so the flight-time from launch to the nuclear-bombing (if the ground-invasion of Russia encounters defeat) will be less than ten minutes, sometimes even less than the time for Russia to get its own missiles launched in retaliation against ours; and so a U.S. blitz nuclear attack against Russia could conceivably be an entirely one-sided war. Here is how that scenario — the end of physical M.A.D. — has actually become the objective sought by the U.S. government (and the necessary backstory for America’s war-drills on Russia’s borders): In 2006, the U.S. aristocracy published in the journal Foreign Affairs, from their Council on Foreign Relations, the first article which said that the U.S. goal should no longer be a continuation of M.A.D., but instead “The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy” , by which the U.S. aristocracy meant the rise of America’s ability to win a nuclear war against Russia. It established this stunning goal merely by saying that such an objective could be achieved and that it should be achieved, and by the article’s being published by the U.S. aristocracy itself (the people who control this country), and by furthermore the U.S. aristocracy not condemning and rejecting and repudiating it but simply letting that article stand with little to no public discussion (and no public debate) about it, much less with the chorus of public condemnations of it in the U.S. press, such as would have happened if America were a democracy — but this nation no longer is a democracy, it has become an aristocracy , and this aristocracy had now published the “Nuclear Primacy” article. (By contrast, in the obscure journal China Security was published in the Autumn 2006 issue the main critique against it, “The Fallacy of Nuclear Primacy” . That article had no impact.) The Foreign Affairs article even was so bold as to assert that “U.S. leaders have always aspired to this goal” (nuclear primacy) — a wild and unsupported allegation that’s not much different from alleging that not only George W. Bush but all U.S. Presidents after World War II were aspiring to have the ability to conquer Russia (and the authors were asserting that only now was this supposedly terrific ability coming within reach). It was explicit about G.W. Bush’s having this desire: “The intentional pursuit of nuclear primacy is, moreover, entirely consistent with the United States’ declared policy of expanding its global dominance. The Bush administration’s 2002 National Security Strategy explicitly states that the United States aims to establish military primacy.” That allegation was tragically true, which is one of the reasons why Bush (like his father, who actually started the determined policy to achieve nuclear primacy) was so dangerous and harmful a President. His invasion of Iraq was merely a sympton of that deeper disease. And, so, this article about “The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy” and “The End of” M.A.D., was now — since it was published by the CFR and not rejected by any influential group — accepted within the U.S. as a goal, “Nuclear Primacy,” which the U.S. government could and should strive for. That idea, of a winnable nuclear war (winnable by the U.S., of course), was no longer heretical, no longer viewed as repugnant. In fact, this article had been introduced and accepted by Harvard University simultaneously in its longer form and simultaneously published by their scholarly journal International Security , which is the leading (it’s the world’s most influential) scholarly journal dealing with that subject, and its title there was “The End of MAD?” . (The periods are customarily removed from the acronym “M.A.D.”, perhaps in order to associate the M.A.D. concept with the pejorative term, insanity. So — at least in the United States — the termination of M.A.D. has always had a favorable ring to it, even before that goal became effectively U.S. policy, which it has been at least ever since 2006.) And no one was saying that Harvard and its journal and the CFR were the ones who were at all “mad” or anything similar, such as “insane.” The aristocracy’s stamp of approval upon the concept of nuclear primacy was clear, from at least 2006 on. Although M.A.D. continued as regards Russia’s side, it no longer remained operative thinking on America’s side. That’s now clear, and this is Russia’s predicament — and the world’s (because a nuclear war involving even just one of the two nuclear superpowers would destroy the world ). U.S. President Barack Obama is putting the goal of nuclear primacy into place, starting with implementation of Ronald Reagan’s proposed “Star Wars” Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) defense system, now called the Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, and technically called by the name of its current embodiment: Lockheed Martin’s, Boeing’s, and Raytheon’s, Aegis Ashore system, which Obama first made operational in Romania on 12 May 2016 . It’s designed so as to enable a surprise nuclear attack against Russia in which any missiles that Russia might be able to launch in retaliation will supposedly (if the system works 100%) be annihilated during their launch-phase. Officially , however, its purpose is to defend Europe from being attacked by Iranian missiles. Any public U.S. admission that this ‘defensive’ system is actually preparation for a blitz U.S. nuclear assault on Russia is obviously out of the question. And, obviously, Russians know that Obama is lying and that this is preparation by the U.S. for a blitz nuclear attack against Russia. The West’s ‘news’ media might be such ‘fools’ as not to be aware of that fact, but Putin has made quite clear that he is not, and he is preparing Russia to deal with it. Obama’s action here was made possible by U.S. President George W. Bush’s 2002 unilateral termination of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic-Missile Treaty with Russia’s predecessor, the Soviet Union. Bush rushed forward with Reagan’s “Star Wars” program even despite there having been no successful tests of the necessary technology: the existing technology consistently failed but Bush decided to invest $53 billion of U.S. taxpayers’ money in it . Bush in 2004 received British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s participation and provisioning of locations and facilities to implement the plan , and Bush was also pressing both Poland and the Czech Republic to allow the U.S. to position ABMs there . Obama came into office criticizing the ABM plan and pretending not to be hostile toward Russia. He deceived Vladimir Putin into thinking that Obama sincerely wanted to pursue peace and cooperation with Russia. As soon as Obama became re-elected, his verbal smiling teeth immediately became actual glaring fangs. Then, soon after his regime overthrew in a bloody February 2014 coup the Moscow-friendly democratically elected President of Ukraine, bordering Russia , Russia started in the summer of 2014 to ignore the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, because for Washington the next step (beyond Ukraine) clearly now would be Moscow and so all bets were off. The installation of the Aegis Ashore in Romania likewise violates that Treaty , which is one important reason why Obama lies to say that all of the Aegis Ashore facilities will be targeted against Iran — and maybe also North Korea — but never against Russia. The full Aegis Ashore system, which will require several such sites, isn’t yet operational. NATO’s PR-arm the Atlantic Council, has mentioned among the Aegis Ashore’s benefits, that for the next such site, in Poland, “Poland announced in late April that it would buy eight Patriot missile batteries from Virginia-based Raytheon Co. in a deal that could generate at least $2.5 billion in US export content.” The U.S. government officials and their friends who have invested in Raytheon and the other ‘defense’ firms didn’t need to be informed of this by any PR person. They already knew of it from more reliable sources, and perhaps they even have invested in nuclear bunkers for themselves and their friends and their friends’ friends . Lots of money is changing hands during this build-up. Also in 2006, later in that year, specifically on 18 November 2006, was published at Global Research, which is an independent Canadian online international site dealing with geostrategy, a superb summary of the connection that this plan has to America’s string of invasions in the Middle East. It’s titled “Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a ‘New Middle East’,” by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, who explains: It should be noted that in his book, “The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geo-strategic Imperatives,” Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former U.S. National Security Advisor, alluded to the modern Middle East as a control lever of an area he, Brzezinski, calls the Eurasian Balkans. The Eurasian Balkans consists of the Caucasus (Georgia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, and Armenia) and Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan) and to some extent both Iran and Turkey. Iran and Turkey both form the northernmost tiers of the Middle East (excluding the Caucasus4) that edge into Europe and the former Soviet Union. The Map of the “New Middle East” A relatively unknown map of the Middle East, NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan, and Pakistan has been circulating around strategic, governmental, NATO, policy and military circles since mid-2006. It has been casually allowed to surface in public, maybe in an attempt to build consensus and to slowly prepare the general public for possible, maybe even cataclysmic, changes in the Middle East. This is a map of a redrawn and restructured Middle East identified as the “New Middle East.” MAP OF THE NEW MIDDLE EAST Note: The following map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006). Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military officers. This map, as well as other similar maps, has most probably been used at the National War Academy as well as in military planning circles. Brzezinski’s advocacy of “American Primacy” fits perfectly with the aristocracy’s support of “Nuclear Primacy,” and appeared eight years before it. His 1998 book was seminal also in many other ways. And, as that Nazemroaya article made clear, Brzezinski’s plan was already being put into effect by the U.S. government, even before 2006. However, the person who actually made the seminal decision behind all of this, the decision to conquer Russia, was U.S. President George Herbert Walker Bush, on the night of 24 February 1990, just before the Soviet Union ended. He was the person who decided that after the USSR and its Warsaw Pact terminated, NATO would continue that cold war until Russia has been surrounded by U.S. allies, who are Russia’s enemies, when Russia will ultimately either surrender or else be destroyed by the U.S. and its friends. Even if Russia assumes that any such nuclear war would be M.A.D., the government of the U.S. no longer does. That’s Russia’s predicament — and the world’s . However, military planners in the U.S. and its vassal nations, do not include in their calculations the world: the impacts that such nuclear winter and all the rest will have if their dream of ‘nuclear primacy’ amounts to anything more than merely the vicious hoax that it is. This fact, of their ignoring the world, is scandalous — against our military planners. They are so obsessed with ‘victory’, that they are willing to participate in this false and potentially mega-catastrophic dream, of ‘nuclear primacy’. Unless and until nuclear weapons are totally eliminated (which might never happen), their constructive function, of preventing WW III, must continue, not end as a result of ‘nuclear primacy’ and other such lies and delusions. However, the ‘news’ media, especially in ‘The West’, are not pointing out those lies and distortions, but instead reinforcing them. If there is to be a WW III, it will end the world . That is the key fact, which is ignored by ‘The West’s’ military planners. NATO needs to end now, just as the Warsaw Pact did in 1991 — when an indecent, oligarchic , ‘The West’ continued the Cold War despite the Warsaw Pact’s end, and now is making it hot. | 0 |
CIA Director Mike Pompeo told senators Thursday that he believed Venezuelan government and criminally owned weapons could end up in the hands of terrorist organizations and drug cartels, creating an “incredibly real and serious” danger to the region. [Pompeo testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on an array of international threats to the United States and the Western Hemisphere generally. During his testimony, Sen. Marco Rubio ( ) asked about Venezuela specifically, noting that the socialist regime has armed gangs, known as colectivos, to use them to threaten and attack dissidents. “We all are aware of the Maduro regime’s cozy relationship with Hezbollah, with the FARC, which is a designated terrorist organization, and links to ” Rubio noted, asking whether the proliferation of weapons given to colectivos is a “real threat. ” “Senator, it is a real threat,” Pompeo replied. “As we have all seen, the situation in Venezuela continues to deteriorate, Maduro gets more desperate by the hour. The risk of these colectivos acting in a way that is not under his control increases as time goes on as well. ” “There are plenty of weapons running around in Venezuela. And this risk is incredibly real and serious and ultimate threat to South America and Central America in addition to just in Venezuela,” he added. While noting the threat to the immediate region surrounding Venezuela, weapons in the hands of groups like the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) who participate in continental drug trafficking, and Mexican drug cartels that operate near the American border could also threaten to harm the national security of the United States. Pompeo noted that no evidence exists that the Nicolás Maduro socialist regime sells weapons to these groups. Venezuela is known to have close ties to the FARC and Hezbollah, with FARC leader “Timochenko” exiled in Havana extending his support to Maduro in April. The Venezuelan Chavista regime has long kept close ties to Hezbollah’s main patron, Iran, and has reportedly issued passports to Syrian, Iranian, and other nationals affiliated with Hezbollah. The U. S. Treasury has designated Venezuela’s vice president, Tareck el Aissami, a known “drug kingpin” for ties to both the FARC and Hezbollah, as well as other regional cocaine trafficking outlets. In the Worldwide Threat Assessment of the U. S. Intelligence Community published by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) this week, the DNI notes that Venezuela is currently facing a “collapsing economy” and volatile political situation that threatens to create a regional threat. “The unpopular government charges that the opposition is waging an economic war and trying to stage a political coup and will probably ratchet up repression to maintain power,” the report notes. “Shortages of food, medicine, and basic supplies will probably continue to stoke tensions through 2017. ” people have died in the latest wave of protests within the past month, including individuals who were not protesting but were asphyxiated by tear gas in their own homes. Protests erupted in March following an attempt by the Supreme Court to install itself as the nation’s Congress. In response to the protests, Maduro declared in April that he will be handing out free firearms to at least 400, 000 of his supporters to form colectivos and seeks to arm one million socialists. Private ownership of firearms is banned in Venezuela, leaving only criminals and soldiers armed in one of the world’s deadliest countries. In 2014, Maduro opened “disarmament centers” to encourage the few civilians possessing weapons and not affiliated with the government to disarm voluntarily. The Venezuelan government also possesses hundreds of Russian missiles and 400, 000 and mines, which experts fear could fall into the hands of terrorists should Maduro lose power. Former President Barack Obama declared Venezuela a national security threat to the United States in 2015, a move that Maduro claimed was the first step to an invasion of the Latin American country. | 1 |
Go to Article In The Bubble, life continues for progressive Americans as if the election never happened… Comment on this Article Via Your Facebook Account Comment on this Article Via Your Disqus Account Follow Us on Facebook! | 0 |
Print
[Ed. – It does seem a bit thoughtless of the Italians, to have not at least arranged to clothe the migrants from the couture designers’ off-the-rack lines.]
African migrants who took the streets in protest and blocked traffic in Venice this week have been demanding designer clothes, the president of the Cooperativa Sociale Onlus has revealed.
Lorenzo Chinalleto, whose cooperative hosts migrants at the Hotel Byron in the Venice province, said migrants respond with displeasure when receiving clothes from Catholic charity Caritas and other charitable bodies, because the goods are unbranded.
He explained: “Unfortunately they come to Italy with the asylum reception systems of northern Europe as a model. When they arrived we gave them clothes, standard clothes.
“But they want brand-name clothes like Armani and Boss, and they asked for Pirelli shoes. These are their models. When they came to us, they didn’t have clothes, but they all had smartphones,” the Italian added .
Forty of the migrants hosted at the Hotel Byron took to the streets to express their dissatisfaction, blocking the traffic. In a video taken outside the hotel on Monday protesters can be seen shouting, in English, that they don’t want to eat pasta. The migrants originate mostly from Senegal, Nigeria, Somalia, Mali and Ghana, Il Gazzettino reported . | 0 |
Jonathan Swan reports that White House Chief Strategist and former Breitbart News executive Steve Bannon is “united by a common enemy” with his more moderate and liberal peers: WH Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and Senior Adviser Jared Kushner, respectively. [Bannon, Priebus, and Kushner are fighting back against federal bureaucrats trying to take down President Donald Trump through via damaging leaks and collusion with journalists, the article states. From Axios: The escalating crisis surrounding the Russia investigation (with reports last night on FBI interest in Jared Kushner) looks like good news for somebody in the White House: Steve Bannon. Nine sources in the West Wing and within Trump’s close orbit said the Russia situation is Bannon’s shot at redemption. He’s being described as a “wartime consigliere” relishing a fight against the “deep state,” media, Democrats and investigators. Why it matters: Bannon had been on very rocky footing recently (to the extent that the President has vented to a number of people about him) but the bolstering of the White House team to respond to the outside crises is a joint effort led by Kushner, Bannon and Chief of Staff Reince Priebus, two sources said. The senior staff that had been out for each other is now united by a common enemy. … [Among Swan’s reasons “why Bannon allies say he’s made for this crisis”:] At Breitbart he ran a war against the mainstream media — one of the two identified enemies for Trump currently (the other is the “deep state,” which the team expects will keep leaking against Trump). Read the rest of the story here. | 1 |
WASHINGTON — Shortly after Hillary Clinton was interviewed on Saturday by agents at the F. B. I. ’s headquarters, its director, James B. Comey, heard from his deputies that Mrs. Clinton had been truthful and forthcoming in the meeting. Mr. Comey, who had been regularly briefed on the progress of the yearlong investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s email account as secretary of state, had known for some time that his agents had not uncovered enough evidence to charge her or anyone else with a crime. Now, with the interview done, he told his deputies, according to F. B. I. officials, that he wanted to move forward with a plan he had been working on for months to explain the findings from such a politically contentious investigation to the public. And he did not wait to do it. At 11 a. m. on Tuesday, Mr. Comey walked into a conference room on the first floor of the F. B. I. ’s headquarters, where he stood behind a lectern for 15 minutes and laid out in clinical detail how Mrs. Clinton’s use of the account was “extremely careless. ” But, he said, the bureau would recommend to the Justice Department that she not be charged with a crime because his investigators had found no clear evidence that Mrs. Clinton had intentionally broken the law. The careful approach to publicly explaining his thinking fit a pattern for Mr. Comey, who, throughout his three decades as a law enforcement official, has refused to shy away from politically fraught issues. While he was immediately praised by some for his candor and transparency, it did not insulate him from criticism from both Republicans and Democrats, as well as some legal experts. Republicans contended that Mr. Comey had rushed the decision to clear Mrs. Clinton before the bureau had time to digest what she had said in the interview, and that his decision came suspiciously close to Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s impromptu meeting with former President Bill Clinton only a week before. They said Mr. Comey’s own description of the F. B. I. ’s findings on Tuesday was enough evidence to file criminal charges. “This defies logic,” said Representative Robert W. Goodlatte, the Virginia Republican who leads the House Judiciary Committee. Mr. Goodlatte said he had spoken with Mr. Comey immediately after his announcement to express his concerns. Later Tuesday, Mr. Goodlatte sent Mr. Comey a letter demanding answers to eight pointed questions about the handling of the investigation and the implication for future inquiries. Robert Cattanach, a former Justice Department lawyer who now works in private practice in Chicago on cybersecurity and other issues, said it was puzzling for Mr. Comey not to seek criminal charges after laying out significant evidence of serious security breaches. “This decision will not enhance the credibility of the F. B. I. or the director,” he said, given the amount of evidence the agency uncovered about mishandled, classified information. Mrs. Clinton’s supporters and other Democrats contended that Mr. Comey had talked too much, saying it was not fair for him to have laid out the details in a case in which she will not be charged. “He has essentially put himself in the place of judge,” Matthew Miller, a former senior official in the Obama Justice Department who supports Mrs. Clinton, said in a telephone interview. He added, “He’s clearing her, but he’s smearing her at the same time, and the department’s rules prevent that kind of thing from happening. ” “What Director Comey did today was appalling,” Mr. Miller said. He added that the F. B. I. should be laying out its investigative findings in court when prosecutors actually bring a case, not at a televised news conference where charges are not being sought. But Thomas DiBiagio, a Washington lawyer who worked closely with Mr. Comey when both were federal prosecutors at the Justice Department in the Bush administration, said the unusual public nature of the announcement showed Mr. Comey’s willingness to “take the hit” on a controversial decision. “This was a for him,” Mr. DiBiagio said. “There’s no way he was going to please everyone on this one. Had he decided to recommend charging her, he would have been heavily criticized and scrutinized, and in the decision today, he’s clearly being heavily criticized and scrutinized, too. So he stood up there and said, ‘I’m going to take the criticism.’ That’s what an F. B. I. director does. ” Mr. Comey’s announcement also served to take the spotlight off Ms. Lynch, who was widely criticized after she met Mr. Clinton on her plane in Arizona last week and after she said on Friday that she would defer to the F. B. I. and to prosecutors about whether to bring charges. As deputy attorney general in the George W. Bush administration, Mr. Comey was at the center of a dramatic dispute with administration officials in 2004, when he refused to reauthorize a secret National Security Agency wiretapping program put into place after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. Mr. Comey believed parts of the warrantless wiretapping program might have been illegal. That led to a showdown in a Washington hospital room, where Attorney General John Ashcroft was ill. Two of Mr. Bush’s top aides, Andrew H. Card Jr. and Alberto R. Gonzales, were trying to pressure Mr. Ashcroft to sign the order. Mr. Comey met with Mr. Bush the next day about the episode, and he and more than a dozen other officials threatened to resign over what they saw as a usurpation of power by White House officials. Mr. Comey’s testimony about the episode before a Senate committee three years later was the stuff of a Hollywood film, as he described racing to the hospital in an F. B. I. car with sirens blaring to try to get to the attorney general’s room before Mr. Card and Mr. Gonzales. In his congressional testimony, Mr. Comey described the events as “the most difficult of my professional career. ” “I was angry,” Mr. Comey told the committee. “I had just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man, who did not have the powers of the attorney general because they had been transferred to me. I thought he had conducted himself in a way that demonstrated a strength I had never seen before, but still I thought it was improper. ” President Obama appointed Mr. Comey in 2013 to head the F. B. I. but Mr. Comey has not shied away from clashing with the administration. Last October, Mr. Comey gave a speech in which he said that additional scrutiny and criticism of police officers after several highly publicized episodes of police brutality might have led to an increase in violent crime in some cities because officers had become less aggressive. “I’ve been told by a senior police leader who urged his force to remember that their political leadership has no tolerance for a viral video,” Mr. Comey said in his speech, adding that many leaders and police officers to whom he had spoken said they were afraid to address the issue publicly. The speech angered senior White House officials, who contended that Mr. Comey had no evidence to back up his claims and that he was undermining their efforts to overhaul the criminal justice system. Just days after the speech, Mr. Comey met with Mr. Obama in the Oval Office to discuss their views, but he has continued to voice his opinion on the topic — even as White House officials have maintained there is little evidence to support his views. | 1 |
Offensive Aims to Reopen Supply Lines to Nusra-Held East by Jason Ditz, October 28, 2016 Share This
With al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front losing territory in recent weeks around Aleppo, and seeing their main stronghold in the city’s east increasingly surrounded, the group and some of its allies have launched a new offensive south of the city aimed at opening the supply lines back up.
Clashes have been reported throughout the day in several areas around government-held western Aleppo , with the attackers coming from further west, likely reinforcements from Nusra’s main territory, the Idlib Province. Locals described substantial fighting.
This has been a recurring feature in the battle over Aleppo since 2012, but particularly over the past several months, with each side getting a sizeable advantage only to lose it to a sudden counterattack from the other, leaving the civilian population trapped within.
Over the past few weeks, however, it had seemed like Aleppo was really going to be reunified by the military, with Nusra forces on their heels and Russia feeling confident enough to put their airstrikes on hold. Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered the ceasefire to continue, despite calls from the military to resume attacks.
Exactly how far the latest offensive has gotten is a major of debate, with Nusra claiming they’d captured a suburb that amounts to the whole southwestern corner of Aleppo, and government officials denying that they’d lost anywhere near so much. As usual, it will take some time for this to shake out and become clear what territory changed hands. Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz | 0 |
We Are Change
Obama’s brother from Kenya, Malik, wants him to Pardon Julian Assange. It seems hate of the international whistle-blower Organization doesn’t run in the family. Malik told Obama, via twitter, “brother please pardon Julian Assange! All he is doing is freeing emails.”
@POTUS brother please pardon Julian Assange! All he is doing is freeing emails
— Malik Obama (@ObamaMalik) October 26, 2016
Something that based Obama said himself was that he was for more transparency in government, but that was Obama before he was in office for a few years, that was campaign Obama. Then during his first term he said this about transparency and the truth:
“The only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.” ~Barack Obama
Those promises were just that, promises, like every year we get together and pretend voting is going to change something; and listen to candidates feed us bull shit when every year election fraud has been the centralized problem that subverts democracy like the plague.
And now we have potentially the worst two “choices” for presidential history; both have a corrupt past. We the American people are being asked to forgive one of these two people: Donald Trump for his potentially corrupt deals with the mafia, or Hillary with her long list of corruption since Arkansas in the 1980s, which has expanded since Wikileaks began leaking John Podesta’s emails, confirming that Donald Trump’s nickname “Crooked Hillary” was accurate. Hillary Clinton has cronies in power already; the other, new to politics and a former entertainer and businessman, is Donald Trump. One, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said, if voted in, we are going to war; the other, he said there would be peace.
The emails that wikileaks has been releasing have revealed a multitude of corruption revelations behind both the Clinton Campaign, exposing Hillary Clinton’s character and demeanor itself. Exposing her pay-to-play schemes as Secretary of State, lies to the American public on issues while in secret taking “big donations” for speeches, the opposite of what she says she supports, and something she calls a “public and private opinion” on issues, which most logical people would call lying and deceiving voters.
Obama, himself, lied for Hillary and said he didn’t know about the private server which Wikileaks has exposed. Obama was sending emails back and forth to Hillary’s email address proving that he did indeed know about the server and that the email she was using wasn’t a state.gov-provided email account.
So Obama’s brother wants him to forget about all that, the Cablegate scandal which, again, Hillary Clinton was apart of, and more? To say the least, Wikileaks and its founding owner Julian Assange have a long rap sheet with the Obama administration. They have crossed paths many times and Malik wants Barack to just forget about it. That’s unlikely but, hey, it’s the thought that counts, right?
In another twist of fate Malik Obama also supports Donald Trump sporting the # Africans4Trump hashtag in his twitter bio, complete with Donald Trump’s signature hashtag #MAGA. He also has a series of tweets that are saying most of what every other normal American, without a President as a brother, is saying, “This election looks rigged.” That’s right Obama’s brother believes in the dreaded chupacabra election fraud monster that visits every 4 years, just another thing that sets him apart from his brother.
He additionally mocked Hillary’s pay-to-play scandal tweeting the 100K check he was accidentally sent by a mogul in Tehran . I wonder if Malik has seen the Project Veritas videos ?
Do not let my brother rig the election @realDonaldTrump
— Malik Obama (@ObamaMalik) October 26, 2016
America always lectures Afrika about elections but this election looks rigged! Vote Trump anyway
— Malik Obama (@ObamaMalik) October 27, 2016
Do not cheat Colorado or New Hampshire. I will know and I will be mad
— Malik Obama (@ObamaMalik) October 27, 2016
Obama also hates Trump so are we sure these two are really related? Someone get Maury for a DNA test. Apparently Malik also wonders if they are related sometimes too.
Well they are half-brothers so that may explain the chemical imbalance in the force some what..
All I know is that my brother has done nothing for the Kenyan side of his family. I wonder if we are related sometimes.
— Malik Obama (@ObamaMalik) October 25, 2016
Wikileaks additionally in a nod to Malik, tweeted out “Assange & Kenya’s background” with a link to “The looting of Kenya under President Moi.”
President Obama's brother calls for @POTUS to pardon Assange https://t.co/BjtaY2wrJ1
Assange & Kenya, background: https://t.co/BQ8EqCXTqD
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) October 26, 2016
The post Obama’s Brother Malik Supports Trump AND Wants Obama To Pardon Julian Assange appeared first on We Are Change .
| 0 |
MILTON KEYNES (UNITED KINGDOM) (AFP) — It’s got money, jobs and it voted Brexit: the town of Milton Keynes near London represents a slice of voters fed up with a political elite ignoring their concerns. [Just as in the United States, it was not just struggling workers fed up with the flip side of globalisation who rebelled last year. “We continually underestimate the silent majority,” said Richard Heffernan, an expert in government at The Open University, which was set up in Milton Keynes shortly after the town was established in 1967. Three days after the inauguration of billionaire property tycoon Donald Trump as US president on January 20, the town will celebrate its 50th anniversary. Enjoying some of the best employment and growth rates in Britain, Milton Keynes could have been fertile ground for those backing the status quo in Britain’s 2016 vote on whether to stay in the European Union. But the town voted by 51 percent for Britain to leave the bloc, closely mirroring the vote split across the country. Alongside the state of the economy, Britons who voted to leave the EU said their two other motivating factors were the influx of East European immigrants and the importance of national sovereignty. In Milton Keynes, the latter seemed to dominate. “It was not so much immigration as sovereignty and accountability,” retired nurse Diana Miller said of her Leave vote as she toured an exhibition to mark the town’s anniversary. In the 1975 referendum on Britain’s entry into what was then the European Economic Community, “we voted for the common market, not a loss of sovereignty,” she said. “We are a powerful country, we value our independence. ” — ‘Bang on the money’ — The townsfolk put their concerns over the EU directly to then prime minister David Cameron in a television special four days before the June 23 referendum. Voters quizzed Cameron on immigration, the possibility of Turkish accession to the bloc and the idea of spending more money on the National Health Service (NHS) instead of the EU budget. The Brexit result exposed a gulf between metropolitan types and the north, just as the US vote revealed divisions between city liberals and rural conservatives. Yet in both countries, it was quiet support in those places in between that really made the difference. “As the nation goes, so goes Milton Keynes,” said Heffernan. “It’s moderate, centrist, and since 1997 it has been an electoral bellwether, in the same way as Ohio in the United States. “In terms of Brexit, it was bang on the money. ” But the depth of its euroscepticism did not set alarm bells ringing for the establishment, despite political parties spending years doing focus groups in Milton Keynes, seen it as a microcosm of public opinion. “A lot of people who study politics and analyse it are part of a metropolitan elite,” Heffernan told AFP. “The liberal elite’s inability to represent many people was held against them. ” Following the Brexit and Trump votes there are now a plethora of movements in Europe seeking to rise up against urban and political elites, as well as against Brussels, and “return” their countries to the struggling middle classes. — Boomtown backs Brexit — The story of Milton Keynes is being told in an exhibition entitled “A New City Comes To Life” which is located in the main shopping centre. Built as a 1960s futuristic vision, its layout is unique in Britain and its boulevards were for the motor age. Sited in the prosperous southeast of England, its major local employers include Spanish bank Santander and German carmakers Volkswagen and . It has seen the highest jobs growth of any British city, up 18 percent between 2004 and 2013. Milton Katherine Moore, 31, who is qualified in catering but off work while looking after her baby, said: “There’s always good job opportunities here. If you’re trained in those fields, there’s so much work. I will never leave. “The only reason I voted out was the NHS. But we need the foreign people, they built it up. ” Heffernan said it was alienation, not apathy, that stirred hitherto silent centrists into backing Brexit and Trump. “It applies to professionals as much as to people who hammer metal,” he said. “Politicians are now like rabbits caught in the headlights. They’re aware the guy driving at them doesn’t like them — and they don’t know what to do. ” | 1 |
Surely, even in these fractured times, just about everyone could agree on an antislavery measure. Right? Lawmakers in Colorado unanimously agreed to put a question onto the Nov. 8 ballot, asking if voters would like to remove an archaic reference to slavery in the state’s Constitution that allows it as a punishment for crime. There was virtually no public opposition or campaign against the amendment, which was supported by Republicans and Democrats. Newspapers editorialized in favor, and activists considered it a slam dunk. What could go wrong? As it turns out, plenty. As of Thursday afternoon, votes were still being counted — but the effort looked as if it was doomed to defeat, with the “no” votes leading the “yes” votes by more than 35, 000 with almost 2. 4 million votes cast. A recount is possible. Was it a hidden racist vote? Could more than a million people in Colorado really be in favor of keeping a slavery loophole? Activists and lawmakers bewildered by the defeat say the answer may be much more simple: Voters say they were disoriented by a mouthful of a ballot question, leaving them unsure what “yes” and “no” actually meant. The question read: “Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution concerning the removal of the exception to the prohibition of slavery and involuntary servitude when used as a punishment for persons duly convicted of a crime?” “I think people were confused by the language,” said Representative Joe Salazar, a Democrat who sponsored the bipartisan legislation to put the question on the ballot. “I don’t think this was a pushback at all by individuals saying they wanted slavery in the Constitution. I just think the language was too confusing. ” The punishment exception was referring to prison labor when it was written in 1876, but constitutional law experts say it is now unnecessary because of current labor practices. “Many people thought, ‘If I vote yes, I’m voting to put this language in the Constitution,’ because it seemed inconceivable that it was already there,” said Melissa Hart, a professor at the University of Colorado Law School. Even lawyers Ms. Hart spoke with were surprised to learn that not only was the language in the state’s Constitution, but it also remains in the 13th Amendment of the United States Constitution, which abolished slavery when it was ratified in 1865. It states: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. ” The language goes back even further — to when the United States territory was expanding. Both the Northwest Ordinance in 1787 and the Missouri Compromise in 1820 prohibited slavery but carved out the same exception for criminal punishment. At the time, labor camps in prisons were common as a way to rehabilitate criminals, Professor Hart said. Since the prisoners were working without payment, it was considered a form of indentured servitude. But in the current day, the idea that there could be any situations in which slavery would be allowed did not sit well with activists. “It just shouldn’t be a Colorado value,” said William Dickerson, a community activist with Together Colorado, a organization that led the campaign to remove the language. “It shouldn’t be in the bedrock of our founding document, both on the state level and on the national level. ” Activists said the effort might also have been hurt by a state voter guide that was mailed to every registered voter, which was required to list arguments for and against the amendment. It said the change could “result in legal uncertainty around current offender work practices in the state. ” That was a “ argument” that was concocted to meet the legal standard for having an argument against it, but few people were genuinely concerned, Mr. Salazar said. Nonetheless, some voters could have been persuaded by it, he said. The voter guide also said that 25 states did not have language related to slavery in their constitutions, and that those states had had no issues with their prison work and community service programs. “Removing the language reflects fundamental values of freedom and equality, and makes an important symbolic statement,” it said. Though stunned by the apparent defeat, those supporting the change are vowing to get the question on a ballot again — next time, with simpler language. “We’re going to do it again,” Mr. Salazar said. “We’re going to make sure we finally rid the Constitution of that language. ” | 1 |
The World Economic Forum’s annual gathering of globalist political, financial and cultural elitists is underway in Davos, Switzerland, but the organization’s founder is planning an emergency Washington, D. C. meeting in 2017 for worried elites worldwide to discuss how to deal with Donald J. Trump. [“The World Economic Forum is listening to Donald Trump,” Bloomberg’s Stephen Morris and Erik Schatzker wrote on Sunday. “The organization will convene a special meeting in Washington this year to discuss issues raised during the ’s campaign and the populist wave that swept him to victory, WEF founder Klaus Schwab told Bloomberg Television on Sunday. The gathering will explore U. S. investment and opportunities for companies that participate in the forum, he said. ” Klaus Schwab, who in 1971 founded the group that eventually became the World Economic Forum which hosts the annual retreat for business, political and cultural elites in the Swiss Alps, told Bloomberg that the event in Washington, D. C. — which was previously not planned — is going to be meant to address globalist concerns with the rise of populism as evidenced by the election of Trump to the presidency. “It’s very natural that with the new administration we plan a major event in the U. S. to see what are the implications of the new president and how the business community could engage,” Schwab said, adding that in Davos in 2017 there are populists present who the globalists plan to hear from to try to assuage a “silent fear” of the masses. “People have become very emotionalized, this silent fear of what the new world will bring,” Schwab added. “We have populists here and we want to listen. We have to respond to these individuals’ fears and to offer solutions. It’s not just enough to listen we have to provide answers and that’s what we’re here for in Davos. ” Schwab said that the Davos gathering is not supposed to be about the glamorous parties and receptions for the elites present, or about the “outrageous excesses of life” exhibited by them there, but rather his goal is to create a “global village” where in the words of Morris and Schatzker “participants can mull weighty issues facing the world without the distractions of a large city. ” “My biggest fear is that we will believe there are very simple answers to very difficult questions,” Schwab said. “The right solution will require a lot of effort and many steps in the right direction. I am optimistic that in a new world we still have the notion of a joined and shared destiny. ” In 2017, the “Party of Davos” so to speak, the World Economic Forum’s annual gathering there in the Swiss Alps, is as Breitbart News has previously reported a gloomier event than usual. Last year, the world elites gathered in Davos were certain that British voters wouldn’t vote to Leave the European Union and that Donald J. Trump would never be elected president of the United States — and that all these fears of populist uprisings around the world would never materialize. But they were wrong, and now Davos attendees are scrambling to try to figure out why. | 1 |
We Are Change
A month ago, this writer told you about an ongoing conflict within the FBI that was validated by online and personal sources concerning the outcome of the Clinton investigation. Now it’s been revealed that the FBI has been flooded with resignations letters by disenfranchised agents ever since Comey decided last July not to indict Hillary Clinton. Comey’s now attempting to save face has reopened the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private server claiming that the FBI has now found an additional 650,000 email messages on Anthony Weiner’s laptop, ten thousand of which were found were in a folder called “Life Insurance.” Things are boiling up for the Clinton campaign, what an October surprise!
10,000 new emails found on Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner's computer and phones. They were in a file marked "Life Insurance". #Corruption
— Morgan Brittany (@MorganBrittany4) October 29, 2016
Weiner is under investigation for sending sexually explicit pictures and material to a 15 year old girl and it drags Hillary’s campaign and chances of presidency with it..
Huma Mahmood Abedin, recently divorced from Weiner, has worked with Hillary Clinton since 1996, where she began as a white-house intern She quickly grew her political career to the position of vice chairman of the Hillary campaign.
What could be found on Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner’s laptop?
A source has a guess at what may potentially be found on Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner’s computer: Huma’s long-speculated ties to the Muslim Brotherhood , something that U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann asserted in 2012 when she accused Huma Abedin of being a mole for the Muslim Brotherhood . Bachmann then said during a live broadcast interview that “the infiltration of our government is much wider than anyone expected.”
“It appears that there has been deep penetration in the halls of our United States government by the Muslim Brotherhood,” Bachmann stated during a radio interview. “It appears that there are individuals who are associated with the Muslim Brotherhood who have positions, very sensitive positions, in our Department of Justice, our Department of Homeland Security, potentially even in the National Intelligence Agency.”
~U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann, said.
Huma actually hasn’t been shy about her potential connection to the brotherhood, earlier in 2016 she confirmed that her Muslim Brotherhood-connected mother Saleha Mahmoud Abedin was proud of her .
Saleha Mahmoud Abedin was identified in 2011 as one of 63 suspected leaders inside the Muslim Sisterhood.
Well we are about to truly find out what was on the laptop of Huma Abedin as the FBI as of Sunday filed for the warrant needed to begin looking through the emails.
Again my source asserts that, “Huma Abedin was copying emails and printing them and she was labeled a threat by the FBI in it’s own report about the Clinton investigation.”
Huma herself said in an interview this week with a podcast that she has yet to read the emails she exchanged with her longtime boss, Hillary Clinton, but that she is “mortified” by what may be in them.
“Terrifying,” is how Abedin described the existence of the records in the public domain during an interview on the “Call Your Girlfriend” podcast.
“I confess I have not read anything that has become public,” Abedin, said.
Comey has jumped on this chance to right his wrongs, seizing an opportunity to save his own career and reputation as well as the FBI’s reputation which, according to a source, has been tarnished. Agents are not happy about the outcome and conduct of the former Director, including some agents that have decided enough is enough and are resigning in droves .
The FBI director has been embroiled in an inside fight against his own agents worried about internal leaks. Comey said it himself in his reasoning for announcing the re-opening of the Clinton email investigation.
Ex-FBI Assistant Director of New York, James Kallstrom weighed in on Comey’s actions calling the Clintons a crime family . Kallstrom also acknowledged the fact that agents were rebelling within the ranks including senior agents.
“The agents are furious with what’s going on, I know that for a fact,”
‘The Clintons, that’s a crime family. It’s like organized crime, basically. The Clinton Foundation is a cesspool,”
~former FBI, assistant director, James Kallstrom , said.
Kallstrom additionally told Fox’s Judge Jeanine Pirro, “I think there is something happening, I think something big is going to happen,” when confronted with the question on why Comey chose 2 weeks before the election to announce the re-opening of an investigation, politicizing the investigation.
Kallstrom made sure to not leave out that it was the higher power of the FBI to blame and not the field agents who were involved in the overall investigation into the Clintons server.
Meanwhile several FBI field offices and U.S. attorneys are busy investigating and collecting evidence on the Clinton Fraudation. The investigation backed by none other then the Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara, who is also investigating Anthony Weiner, who authorized the warrants for the devices to be seized. That means that Preet Bharara is behind both cases on the Clintons – the investigation into the Clinton Fraudation , in which Bharara is leading NY, DC, and Texas branches of the FBI’s investigation into the Clinton’s long time fraud vehicle the “Clinton Foundation”. The Clinton Fraudation investigation was started when Terry Mccauflife was linked to the Clintons and the Chinese mob .
Wikileaks has proven that the Clinton foundation is basically a large money-laundering operation sprinkled with a bit of fraud thanks to Doug Band. Although hacked documents can’t be used for prosecution the new Wiener emails may be identical copies of Huma’s emails that have been leaked in Wikileaks releases, and if it’s true that she printed out copies she could face charges. Additionally there may be evidence of pay-to-play in Huma’s emails as well as fraud, or potentially her ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. We will have to wait to see; stay tuned to WeAreChange for your coverage and analysis of the most eventful election cycle in American history. If what the birds are chirping is true. Is there anything that won’t happen in this election?
#WikiLeaks : Clinton aide details $50M in payments for @BillClinton and how business was mingled with the @ClintonFdn https://t.co/0jhYJkDT0x
— Chad Livengood (@ChadLivengood) October 27, 2016
Judge Jeanine : “So he wouldn’t have come out unless he knew it was coming out?”
James Kallstrom: “ Well, I think he couldn’t hold onto it any longer. OK. Because who knows? Maybe the locals would have stepped in on this.”
Judge Jeanine: ” …I think he had to do it.”
The post FBI Rebels, Huma Abedin “Insurance File” Found On Seized Laptop 10,000 EMAILS appeared first on We Are Change .
| 0 |
0 комментариев 0 поделились Фото: АР
"Это трагедия. Если это было сделано намеренно, то это — военное преступление", — цитирует AFP директора ЮНИСЕФ Энтони Лейка. В сообщении также употребляется слово "нападение".
Как передает Reuters, ссылаясь на спасателей и мониторинговые группы, авиаудары были нанесены сирийской или российской авиацией. Однако СМИ Сирии об ударах по школе не сообщали.
Насколько можно доверять этой информации, рассказал Pravda. Ru сотрудник Центра анализа стратегий и технологий Максим Шеповаленко.
— Как воспринимать такую информацию? На Западе этому верят?
— Очевидно, что это информационный вброс. Это будет продолжаться до конца войны, и я давно уже не обращаю на это внимания. Все пошло враздрай: никаких мирных переговоров, вступил в силу План Б — по вооружению боевиков. Значит, информационная война в самом разгаре.
— Но ведь весь мир обвиняет российские и сирийские войска в причастности к этому, как надо реагировать?
— Не надо оправдываться. Уже всем было сказано, что наши ВКС наносят удары на основе данных космической разведки, агентур, и с дополнительной доразведкой цели. Сколько это можно повторять?
Всем очевидно, что чем ближе мы будем к взятию Алеппо, тем истеричнее и фантасмагоричнее будут все эти придумки и рассказы. Зачем наступать в расставленный силок? На мой взгляд, есть известный предел, до которого надо комментировать такие вещи.
Ранее постоянный представитель РФ при ООН Виталий Чуркин отозвался о произошедшем как об "ужасном" событии, но деталей сообщить не смог. "Мне проще всего сказать, что это не мы, но я ответственный человек, так что мне нужно подождать и посмотреть, что скажет наше министерство обороны", — цитирует дипломата ТАСС.
Напомним, Идлиб — провинция на северо-западе Сирии, граничит с провинцией Алеппо. Территорию Идлиба в 2015 году контролировала террористическая организация "Джебхат ан-Нусра" (запрещена в РФ), и самолеты российских ВКС наносили удары по этому региону. Вооруженное противостояние продолжается в Сирии с марта 2011 года. По данным ООН, за время конфликта погибли более 220 тысяч человек.
Читайте последние новости Pravda.Ru на сегодня Сирия: Когда закончится война? | 0 |
Most mornings as I leave the Y after my swim and shower, I cross paths with a coterie of toddlers entering with their caregivers for a activity. I can’t resist saying hello, requesting a and wishing them a fun time. I leave the Y grinning from ear to ear, uplifted not just by my own workout but even more so by my interaction with these darling representatives of the next generation. What a great way to start the day! When I told a fellow swimmer about this experience and mentioned that I was writing a column on the health benefits of positive emotions, she asked, “What do you do about people who are always negative?” She was referring to her parents, whose chronic negativity seems to drag everyone down and make family visits extremely unpleasant. I lived for half a century with a man who suffered from periodic bouts of depression, so I understand how challenging negativism can be. I wish I had known years ago about the work Barbara Fredrickson, a psychologist at the University of North Carolina, has done on fostering positive emotions, in particular her theory that accumulating “ of positivity,” like my daily interaction with children, can, over time, result in greater overall . The research that Dr. Fredrickson and others have done demonstrates that the extent to which we can generate positive emotions from even everyday activities can determine who flourishes and who doesn’t. More than a sudden bonanza of good fortune, repeated brief moments of positive feelings can provide a buffer against stress and depression and foster both physical and mental health, their studies show. This is not to say that one must always be positive to be healthy and happy. Clearly, there are times and situations that naturally result in negative feelings in the most upbeat of individuals. Worry, sadness, anger and other such “downers” have their place in any normal life. But chronically viewing the glass as is detrimental both mentally and physically and inhibits one’s ability to bounce back from life’s inevitable stresses. Negative feelings activate a region of the brain called the amygdala, which is involved in processing fear and anxiety and other emotions. Dr. Richard J. Davidson, a neuroscientist and founder of the Center for Healthy Minds at the University of Wisconsin — Madison, has shown that people in whom the amygdala recovers slowly from a threat are at greater risk for a variety of health problems than those in whom it recovers quickly. Both he and Dr. Fredrickson and their colleagues have demonstrated that the brain is “plastic,” or capable of generating new cells and pathways, and it is possible to train the circuitry in the brain to promote more positive responses. That is, a person can learn to be more positive by practicing certain skills that foster positivity. For example, Dr. Fredrickson’s team found that six weeks of training in a form of meditation focused on compassion and kindness resulted in an increase in positive emotions and social connectedness and improved function of one of the main nerves that helps to control heart rate. The result is a more variable heart rate that, she said in an interview, is associated with objective health benefits like better control of blood glucose, less inflammation and faster recovery from a heart attack. Dr. Davidson’s team showed that as little as two weeks’ training in compassion and kindness meditation generated changes in brain circuitry linked to an increase in positive social behaviors like generosity. “The results suggest that taking time to learn the skills to positive emotions can help us become healthier, more social, more resilient versions of ourselves,” Dr. Fredrickson reported in the National Institutes of Health monthly newsletter in 2015. In other words, Dr. Davidson said, “ can be considered a life skill. If you practice, you can actually get better at it. ” By learning and regularly practicing skills that promote positive emotions, you can become a happier and healthier person. Thus, there is hope for people like my friend’s parents should they choose to take steps to develop and reinforce positivity. In her newest book, “Love 2. 0,” Dr. Fredrickson reports that “shared positivity — having two people caught up in the same emotion — may have even a greater impact on health than something positive experienced by oneself. ” Consider watching a funny play or movie or TV show with a friend of similar tastes, or sharing good news, a joke or amusing incidents with others. Dr. Fredrickson also teaches “ meditation” focused on directing wishes to others. This can result in people “feeling more in tune with other people at the end of the day,” she said. Activities Dr. Fredrickson and others endorse to foster positive emotions include: Do good things for other people. In addition to making others happier, this enhances your own positive feelings. It can be something as simple as helping someone carry heavy packages or providing directions for a stranger. Appreciate the world around you. It could be a bird, a tree, a beautiful sunrise or sunset or even an article of clothing someone is wearing. I met a man recently who was reveling in the architectural details of the houses in my neighborhood. Develop and bolster relationships. Building strong social connections with friends or family members enhances feelings of and, studies have shown, is associated with better health and a longer life. Establish goals that can be accomplished. Perhaps you want to improve your tennis or read more books. But be realistic a goal that is impractical or too challenging can create unnecessary stress. Learn something new. It can be a sport, a language, an instrument or a game that instills a sense of achievement, and resilience. But here, too, be realistic about how long this may take and be sure you have the time needed. Choose to accept yourself, flaws and all. Rather than imperfections and failures, focus on your positive attributes and achievements. The loveliest people I know have none of the external features of loveliness but shine with the internal beauty of caring, compassion and consideration of others. Practice resilience. Rather than let loss, stress, failure or trauma overwhelm you, use them as learning experiences and steppingstones to a better future. Remember the expression: When life hands you a lemon, make lemonade. Practice mindfulness. Ruminating on past problems or future difficulties drains mental resources and steals attention from current pleasures. Let go of things you can’t control and focus on the . Consider taking a course in insight meditation. | 1 |
RBTH Daily , army , military , arms The Buk-M3 anti-aircraft missile system. Source: Press Photo
On Oct. 21, on the day the Russian army received its new military technology, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said that in October 2016 half of all the military hardware in the Russian armed forces now consisted of new models.
Shoigu, who also holds the rank of army general, noted that in accordance with a presidential decree, by 2020 70 percent of the army's technology will consist of updated models. The first Buk-M3 anti-aircraft missile system in the Russian army
One of the main "gifts" for Russia's army was the Buk-M3 anti-aircraft missile system. Shoigu said that the armed forces had received the first division of Buk-M3s.
"This is not only the modernization of the air defense system that the Russian army already has. Basically, this is a new model with old dimensions," explained Valery Yarmolenko, director of the press service at arms manufacturer Almaz-Antey.
He noted that the Buk-M3's key particularity is the location of the missiles in the launching containers, just like in the S-300 systems, which are simultaneously transport and launching containers.
Thanks to developments made by Russian manufacturers, the missiles can be fired from the 12 cylindrical containers 20 seconds after the system is set up. Unlike its predecessor, the new system can strike missiles and enemy planes not 15 but 70 kilometers (45 miles) away.
The Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper confirms that the Buk-M3 anti-aircraft missiles can strike surface and ground radiocontrast targets – that is, they can be used as tactical-guided missiles and not only defensive weapons. What else has the Russian army received?
In the last three months the Russian armed forces have received a series of defensive systems. Among them are the following:
- two regimental kits of S-400 anti-aircraft missiles systems and six combat Pantsir-S machines;
- the Bal and Bastion missile systems for the Western Military District;
- two divisions of Buk-M2 anti-aircraft systems;
- three intercontinental ballistic missiles;
- 100 Kalibr winged missiles and Onyx anti-missile systems for Russian Navy ships and submarines.
A BUK-M2E surface-to-air missile system on display during the International Aerospace Salon in Zhukovsky near Moscow / Source: Mikhail Voskresenskiy/RIA Novosti
Sergei Shoigu noted that during the Army-2016 Military Technological Forum near Moscow in early September Russia showed the world most of the new technology that the armed forces are now acquiring.
"Defense ministry representatives and foreign and Russian military experts could appreciate Russia's combat possibilities during the demonstrations," he said. Problems with rearming the army
"The modernization and development of the Russian armed forces program, which costs 22 trillion rubles ($343 billion today), can fully guarantee the country's security by the time it terminates in 2022. However, there is a series of problems that must be solved," said Viktor Yesin, former director of the General Staff of the Strategic Missile Forces.
In his words, the modernization of the defense industry, in which three trillion rubles have already been invested ($48 billion), is failing.
"This is due to the sanctions and the fall of Russia's economy. The process of import substitution in the defense enterprises is getting practically nowhere," said Yesin. Russia designing new ‘aircraft carrier killer’ torpedo to boost naval power
According to a source in the Russian defense industry, the main problem lies in the fact that Russia will not be able to substitute imported items in a series of key sectors in the upcoming years.
"One thing is the modernization of enterprises. But creating from scratch certain units that will produce the technology is another. The enterprises will be able to produce the ship and helicopter engines that were imported from other countries by 2018. However, there are many electronic systems accompanying these machines that Russia will not be able to produce independently," said the source.
According to Russian Deputy Defense Minister Timur Ivanov, the financing of the defense industry has diminished due to the crisis, a trend that may continue in 2017.
"Defense industry enterprises have long-term contracts to build ships, missiles, aviation and space satellites. There will be no sequestration here. During crises purchases of secondary technology – armored personnel carriers, engineer machines and so on – are reduced," explained the source. Why is Russia spending so much on modernizing its army?
According to Yesin, the share of defense expenses is unquestionably very big. But if Russia wants to feel secure and not worry about tomorrow, then money must be spent today in order to avoid a repeat of the 1990s and 2000s.
"In terms of nuclear weapons, we are on par with the U.S., but in terms of conventional weapons, we trail significantly. If we want to avoid war, we must make up for what we lacked in the 1990s and 2000s," said Yesin. Subscribe to get the hand picked best stories every week Subscribe to our mailing list Facebook | 0 |
Independent TV station, News Channel 3 in Phoenix has uncovered problems with the George Soros voting machines. The machines are set to rig the election in Arizona, which one of 16 states that are using George Soros’ voting machines.
P lease Donate to The Common Sense Show
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL AND DON’T FORGET TO “LIKE” US
This is the absolute best in food storage. Dave Hodges is a satisfied customer. Don’t wait until it is too late. Click Here for more information.
| 0 |
a reply to: windword Shall I post videos of Hillary laughing at death and mayhem? They are both terrible people. Period end of story. A vote for either one is a vote for idiocy. Hillary was heard calling mentally challenged children 'f*g ree-tards' and caught on record blurting out the terms 'stupid k*e and 'f*ing Jew b*d'. Your hypocrisy is showing again. edit on 26-10-2016 by thesungod because: (no reason given) | 0 |
Archives Michael’s Latest Video Will Michelle Obama Be The Replacement Nominee If The FBI Email Investigation Ends Hillary Clinton’s Campaign? 30th, 2016
I realize that this headline must sound extremely bizarre, but in this article I will explain why this could actually happen. We have just learned that the FBI has obtained a search warrant that will enable the agency to examine approximately 650,000 emails that are sitting on electronic devices owned by Huma Abedin and her estranged husband Anthony Weiner. Now that the FBI is going through these emails, it is unlikely but still possible that a decision about whether or not to charge Hillary Clinton with a crime could be made by November 8th. Of course the most likely scenario is that Hillary Clinton will not be indicted before election day and that Americans will be voting with this scandal hanging ominously over the Clinton campaign. But if the FBI does quickly take action, it is possible that Hillary Clinton could be forced from the race before election day, and that would require the Democrats to come up with a new candidate.
In fact, there are already calls in the mainstream media for Clinton to willingly remove herself from the race. For example, the following comes from a Chicago Tribune article entitled “ Democrats should ask Clinton to step aside “…
So what should the Democrats do now?
If ruling Democrats hold themselves to the high moral standards they impose on the people they govern, they would follow a simple process:
They would demand that Mrs. Clinton step down, immediately, and let her vice presidential nominee, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, stand in her place.
Democrats should say, honestly, that with a new criminal investigation going on into events around her home-brew email server from the time she was secretary of state, having Clinton anywhere near the White House is just not a good idea.
But what the author of that article does not understand is that Tim Kaine would not automatically take her place if Clinton steps down before the election. In a previous article , I included a quote from a U.S. News & World Report article that explained what would happen if Hillary Clinton was removed from the Democratic ticket for some reason prior to November 8th…
If Clinton were to fall off the ticket, Democratic National Committee members would gather to vote on a replacement. DNC members acted as superdelegates during this year’s primary and overwhelmingly backed Clinton over boat-rocking socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
DNC spokesman Mark Paustenbach says there currently are 445 committee members – a number that changes over time and is guided by the group’s bylaws, which give membership to specific officeholders and party leaders and hold 200 spots for selection by states, along with an optional 75 slots DNC members can choose to fill.
But the party rules for replacing a presidential nominee merely specify that a majority of members must be present at a special meeting called by the committee chairman. The meeting would follow procedures set by the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee and proxy voting would not be allowed.
So if this email scandal forced Hillary Clinton to exit the race at the last minute, a majority of the members of the Democratic National Committee would gather to select a new nominee.
Who would they choose?
Let’s take a look at the top five options…
#1 Tim Kaine
He would seem to be an obvious choice since he is Hillary Clinton’s running mate. But to win a national campaign you need to have name recognition, and most Americans outside of the state of Virginia have very little familiarity with him.
And at this point he has proven to have very little popularity on the campaign trail. In fact, attendance at many of his rallies in key swing states can be measured in the dozens.
So to me it seems unlikely that the DNC would select Kaine as the replacement nominee.
#2 Joe Biden
Vice-President Joe Biden has far more name recognition than Tim Kaine does, and in recent days he has been touting how he believes that he would have actually won the nomination if he would have decided to run …
Vice President Joe Biden said in a recent interview that he believed he could have beat former secretary of state Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination had he pursued it.
Biden was asked in an interview with CNN Saturday if news that the FBI was re-opening their criminal probe into Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state made him second-guess his decision last year not to run.
But according to the vice president, the short answer is “no.” The only thing that kept him from running, Biden said, was the recent death of his son, Beau.
Unfortunately for Biden, he suffers from many of the same things that Kaine does.
Biden is boring, he is not very good on the campaign trail, and he doesn’t have the sort of charisma that would motivate people to go to the polls in large numbers.
Biden would probably represent the “safest” choice for the Democrats, but he might not be a winning choice.
#3 Bernie Sanders
Bernie Sanders would seem to be a logical choice since he was the runner-up to Hillary Clinton, but the truth is that there are a lot of things working against Bernie Sanders.
First of all, he does not have any real loyalty to the Democrats. He has previously operated as an independent, and he expressed a desire to return to independent status once the campaign was over.
Secondly, the Democratic establishment very much dislikes him, and that plays a huge role in decisions such as this.
Thirdly, Democratic insiders fear that he would be “another McGovern” and would get absolutely wiped out in a general election.
So even though he is very popular with the radical left, it appears that Sanders would be the least likely choice on this list.
#4 Elizabeth Warren
Elizabeth Warren would be very popular with the “Bernie Sanders” wing of the party, and she would enable the party to replace Hillary Clinton with another woman.
So she is definitely a possibility.
But she does lack name recognition, and just like Sanders there would be concern that the Republicans would frame her candidacy as “another McGovern” because of her far left policies.
#5 Michelle Obama
One recent survey found that 67 percent of all Democrats would rather have a third term for Obama than a first term for Hillary Clinton.
And these days Barack Obama’s approval rating is running anywhere from +9 to +11.
So the thought of another Obama in the White House is not as far-fetched as you might think.
Michelle Obama has better name recognition than anyone else on this list, and she is generally very well-liked by the American people. And she has received a tremendous amount of praise for her work on the campaign trail recently. For instance, her recent speech in New Hampshire was lauded as “the most influential speech of the 2016 campaign” in a recent MSN article entitled “ In this campaign, Michelle Obama became more than just another political voice “…
The speech, amplified by timing and met with an enthusiastic response, cemented Obama’s place as a star of the presidential race and put a defining stroke not just on how women view Trump, but also on herself as a voice of moral authority. Three months before leaving the White House, she already is among the ranks of public figures who transcend politics and title.
“When you rise to a level like that, you see how much weight your words carry,” said Anita McBride, former chief of staff to Laura Bush and executive in residence at the School of Public Affairs at American University. “We know she didn’t like politics. But she was impassioned by the language that was used, and she feels compelled to speak out. People listen to her.”
If I were the Democrats, Michelle Obama is the one that I would select if a replacement nominee was needed, because she would give them the very best chance of winning against Donald Trump.
Of course the Obamas are just as radical as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, but the American people have become quite comfortable with them at this point.
And I certainly hope that Michelle Obama does not become the nominee if Hillary Clinton has to step aside, because Donald Trump would have an exceedingly difficult time defeating her.
In the final analysis, none of this is probably going to matter anyway because it is unlikely that the FBI will move quickly enough to force Hillary Clinton out before election day, but there is still a small chance that it could actually happen.
And if it does happen, it is going to turn politics in America completely upside down.
| 0 |
Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” Trump senior advisor Stephen Miller said the White House had provided “enormous evidence” to make a case there was a “serious problem” of voter fraud in American elections. Miller said, “I actually, having worked on a campaign before in New Hampshire, I can tell you that this issue of busing voters into New Hampshire is widely known by anyone working in New Hampshire politics. It’s very real, very serious. This morning, on this show, is not the venue for me to lay out all the evidence. I can tell you this — voter fraud is a serious problem in the country. You have millions of people who are registered in two states, who are dead who are registered to vote. You have 14 percent of noncitizens, according to academic research, at a minimum, are registered to vote, an astonishing statistic. ” He added, “The White House has provided enormous evidence with respect to voter fraud, with respect to people being registered in more than one state. Dead people voting, being registered to vote. George, it is a fact and you will not deny it that are massive numbers of in this country who are registered to vote. ” ( The Hill) Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN | 1 |
This year’s holiday advertising campaign for the United States Postal Service featured a little girl’s stunningly infectious musical plea: “I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas. ” (And, as she explains, “Only a hippopotamus will do. ”) The ditty was, perhaps, unfamiliar to many listeners, but it penetrated the mind space of the unwary at warp speed — and stayed there. Resistance was futile. Unexpectedly, the song has also upended the quiet retirement of Gayla Peevey, 73, a former child star who recorded the novelty hit in 1953. At the time, the song landed her on the Ed Sullivan show “Toast of the Town. ” Since November, television viewers have been able to enjoy (and enjoy) that same recording in the omnipresent post office commercial. “The song could drive you crazy,” Ms. Peevey conceded. But it doesn’t drive her crazy — not at all. “I love hearing it, and I can’t hear it too much,” she said recently by telephone. Before all the recent hippo hoopla, Ms. Peevey, the former owner of a boutique advertising agency in El Cajon, Calif. had spent her days immersed in good works: for nonprofits and serving on the board of one of them singing in her church choir leading a Bible study group for women. She and her husband of 53 years, Cliff Henderson, a retired elementary school teacher, frequently drive to Los Angeles from their home in La Mesa to visit their daughter, and three grandchildren. There are trips to Hawaii with three other couples, weekly taco nights with those travel companions and “date day” every Friday with Cliff. A full and active life, yes. But a few years ago, Ms. Peevey — generally a sunny soul — was starting to feel a little down. “I saw other people retiring from these big careers, and I started to wonder, ‘What have I really accomplished in life? ’” she said. “I really prayed about it. And I think God decided to throw some blessings on me. ” Ms. Peevey was aware, of course, that the Lord works in mysterious ways, so she’s not at all certain how her childhood recording was rediscovered. Satellite radio, she speculated, or perhaps the internet. But here’s what she knows for sure: “I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas” — which peaked 63 years ago at No. 24 on the Billboard chart — has become a viral sensation. (A video of Ms. Peevey’s “Toast of the Town” appearance — she’s in a party frock and hair ribbon and halts a game of jacks with her playmates to belt out her singular wish — has had more than four million views on YouTube recent comments include, “This song is stuck in my head. ”) But the people at the Postal Service were not the first to harness the power of the song. In 2008, Hallmark came out with a tree ornament that plays the earworm of a tune, written by the songwriter John Rox. (His other hit was “It’s a Big, Wide Wonderful World,” recorded in 1949 by Buddy Clark.) Hallmark has brought the ornament back four more times, including during the 2016 holiday season. Look for it again next year. Gretchen Wilson, a country music singer, recorded the song on a Christmas album that was released in 2009. LeAnn Rimes, another country singer, followed suit in 2014, but said she could never hope to equal Ms. Peevey’s inimitable sound. Thanks to the resurgence in the song’s popularity, Ms. Peevey — who goes by the surname Henderson except for matters — has been deluged with calls and emails from newspapers, television stations and fans all over the world. Royalty checks in amounts ranging from a few hundred dollars to $1, 000 have been rolling in — more about this in a minute. “It’s like a whole new world,” she said. Actually, it’s something of a return to the world Ms. Peevey inhabited as a cute, blond from Oklahoma City. After her record took off, going out in public became an impossibility. “It was crazy,” she remembered. “People were looking and pointing. I got mobbed everywhere I went. ” Ms. Peevey said she started singing “practically out of the womb. ” “I can’t remember when I didn’t sing,” she continued. “I really can’t. ” From an early age, she was a mainstay of the church choir in Ponca City, Okla. where her family moved in 1948. There she put on backyard shows for the neighbors and sang at community events. Her robust voice with its country sheen was a force of nature. An uncle who played fiddle on a radio show broadcast from Oklahoma City arranged a guest spot for Gayla when she was 8 it led first to a gig on (now KFOR) the local NBC affiliate, then to a regular spot on “Saturday Night Revue,” an NBC variety show that was a summer replacement for “Your Show of Shows. ” Hoagy Carmichael was the host. “I sang duets with him,” Ms. Peevey recalled. “There was one of his songs, ‘Two Sleepy People,’ and I sang harmony — it was very fun. ” Guest stars included Jimmy Durante and Dean Martin, with whom Ms. Peevey performed during her first appearance on the program. And every week the show booked a different big orchestra, “so I got to sing with Les Brown and Jerry Fielding and David Rose,” she said. “Plucked out of local television — it was a big jump. But they were so nice to me because I was a kid. ” Then came the contract from Columbia Records. The very first song that Mitch Miller, then a Columbia executive, brought to Ms. Peevey was “I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas. ” She recorded it in New York with Mr. Miller playing the oboe and leading the orchestra. “I didn’t have to sing it that many times,” she recalled. “I would say the third time was the take. ” She introduced the song on “Toast of the Town,” though not without considerable drama beforehand: Her manager canceled an exclusive contract with NBC so that she could appear on the rival network CBS, home of Mr. Sullivan’s show — “and I didn’t get another NBC contract after that,” Ms. Peevey said. “I don’t know if the manager made the best decision, but everybody watched Ed Sullivan,” she said. “The record took off and was a big hit. ” In a media event at the end of 1953, a real, live hippopotamus from the Central Park Zoo was shipped to Oklahoma City as a Christmas present for young Gayla she donated it to her local zoo. At the time, Ms. Peevey said, “there was talk that my career was going to be huge. ” But things didn’t turn out that way, and the producers at Columbia Records may have been part of the problem. “After the hippo song, they thought, ‘Well, that was a big hit,’ so every song they gave me after that was an animal song and they were not good songs, let me tell you,” Ms. Peevey said. She was occasionally teamed with a fellow child star, Jimmy Boyd, singer of the “I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus. ” “My parents didn’t know that they could speak up and say, ‘Is this really the best song? ’” she continued. “In Oklahoma, I was used to singing ‘Your Cheatin’ Heart’ and ‘Walkin’ My Baby Back Home’ and all of those adult songs that I could really sink my teeth into. ” Ms. Peevey’s father, Lewin, a tax collector, and her mother, Irene, a homemaker, were the antithesis of stage parents, not particularly keen on show business and uncertain about how to deal with Gayla’s sudden fame. “They decided that they wanted to take me out of show business so I could have a normal life,” she said. “They pulled the plug, and I was a kid so I didn’t have any say. ” But Ms. Peevey said she was “kind of happy” to get away from all the hubbub. Part of pulling the plug involved a move to Southern California, where she was just another student at the local junior high school. “What a shock it was,” Ms. Peevey remembered. “Nobody knew who I was, and I realized I was lacking some basic social skills that I hadn’t had to develop. ” “I was so used to everybody clamoring for me and coming to me,” she explained. “I didn’t have a lot of experience in reaching out and being a friend. I had a big learning curve in that regard. ” But that was not the only adjustment. To retire as a child star packs a particularly unpleasant wallop. “You have this sort of feeling that you’re a at 12,” Ms. Peevey said. “That was the thing I had to deal with — that I had already peaked. ” She had a bit of a comeback at 16 when “My Little Marine,” a song she wrote and recorded under the name Jamie Horton, made it into the top 100 on Billboard. Another tune, “Robot Man,” “did pretty well, but nothing took off as it did when I was a child,” Ms. Peevey said. “I can see where child stars get into trouble as far as not being able to negotiate the transition to adult performer, and it can be very devastating if you’re not grounded. ” After getting a degree in elementary education, she briefly taught school in San Diego. “But it wasn’t for me,” Ms. Peevey said. Instead, she opened a small advertising business while raising her daughter, Sydney, who inherited Mom’s musical chops. It was Sydney who did a little research three years ago and learned that Ms. Peevey had an account at Sony Music, now the parent company of Columbia. “They were holding funds of just under a hundred grand that had been adding up since 2008,” Ms. Peevey said. “I couldn’t believe it. It’s pretty fun. ” She also has royalties coming in from sales of “I Want a Hippopotamus” on iTunes. “I thought my life as a was going to be all about playing with my grandchildren,” Ms. Peevey said. “But for people to have all this interest in me has opened things up for me — I’ve retired, but my song hasn’t. ” | 1 |
Religions tend to invent ideas and concepts just like every other creative human enterprise, and they have unleashed some remarkably bad ideas onto humanity . Most of these are centered around the notion of telling people what to do and how to live their lives, with the aim of convincing people that conformity to church guidelines will bring some intangible reward in the afterlife.
One example of many is the Christian belief that the one and only way not to eternally burn in Hell is to accept Jesus Christ as the savior, as if no other deity or religious experience is valid to the human experience.
The concept of heaven and hell has been so ingrained into the human psyche that many people cannot see beyond this limiting paradigm to any other possibility. Retired Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong , however, doesn’t seem to believe in the myth of Hell, and during a nationally televised interview he shared his opinions on why he thinks convincing the flock to believe in the concept of ‘Hell’ is absolutely critical to the Church’s survival.
“I don’t think Hell exists. I happen to believe in life after death, but I don’t think it’s got a thing to do with reward and punishment. Religion is always in the control business, and that’s something people don’t really understand. It’s in a guilt-producing control business. And if you have Heaven as a place where you’re rewarded for your goodness, and Hell is a place where you’re punished for your evil, then you sort of have control of the population. And so they create this fiery place which has quite literally scared the Hell out of a lot of people, throughout Christian history. And it’s part of a control tactic.” Many people turn to religious teachings for solace and guidance in life in our insane world, but, Bishop Spong seems to think religion helps people be less responsible for their own life and the world we live in, offering a unique perspective from the typical doctrines of Christian belief. “The church doesn’t like for people to grow up, because you can’t control grown-ups. That’s why we talk about being born again. When you’re born again, you’re still a child. People don’t need to be born again. They need to grow up. They need to accept their responsibility for themselves and the world.” No one can really confirm where human souls are bound after death, so why do religions create stories of places like Heaven and Hell? The answer is simple: to control people and keep the Church alive.
If even some of the most religious men, such as Bishop John Shelby Spong, are starting to publicly expose the motivations behind these stories, perhaps it is time for the masses to critically evaluate the value of religion over the importance of direct personal spiritual experience .
“Every church I know claims that ‘we are the true church’ – that they have some ultimate authority, ‘We have the infallible Pope,’ ‘We have the Bible.’… The idea that the truth of God can be bound in any human system, by any human creed, by any human book, is almost beyond imagination for me.
God is not a Christian. God is not a Jew or a Muslim or a Hindi or Buddhist. All of those are human systems, which human beings have created to try to help us walk into the mystery of God. I honor my tradition. I walk through my tradition. But I don’t think my tradition defines God. It only points me to God.” WATCH THE VIDEO:
Waking Times SOURCE | 0 |
Everyone is familiar with the broadcast images of Neil Armstrong's historic first steps on the moon, and many believe his footsteps to be the first ever on the lunar surface. However, during a documented NASA symposium, Armstrong made comments alluding to the fact that not only had other species visited the moon, but that there were signs of colonization there upon.
The Real Reason NASA Refuses a Return to the Moon
Armstrong stated in an interview with an unnamed professor at the symposium that their presence on the moon during the Apollo 11 mission was immediately noticed and addressed by an alien race. The beings that occupied the lunar air space made very clear their displeasure of the human's arrival on the moon's surface:
Armstrong: It was incredible … of course, we had always known there was a possibility … the fact is, we were warned off. There was never any questions then of a space station or a moon city.
Professor: How do you mean “warned off”?
Armstrong: I can’t go into details, except to say that their ships were far superior to ours both in size and technology – Boy, where they big! … and menacing … No, there is no question of a space station .
Armstrong: Naturally – NASA was committed at that time, and couldn’t risk a panic on earth…. But it really was a quick scoop and back again. (Above Top Secret, p. 186)
Additionally, there are reports that upon arrival on the moon Armstrong witnessed structures on the surface resembling shops and other buildings obviously not designed by man. It is believed that while footage exists of these findings, the decision was made not to make these films public so as to not incite public panic.
WATCH THE VIDEO:
NASA's unwillingness to move forward with lunar cities or even stations can easily be explained by the fear of going against the will of a much more advanced race. Armstrong stated that this fear is what lead to the following Apollo missions to only include a quick landing and sample collection. With this limited access to the moon, NASA or any other space exploration organization would be greatly hindered in their efforts to establish surface space stations of any type and lunar colonies would be completely infeasible.
Could it be that human's exploration of the cosmos is closely regulated by alien races? What lengths would those races go to prevent space travel advancement by humans? Perhaps in the future, humans will gain the favor of the celestial inhabitants and be privy to the mysteries of beyond.
Disclose TV
SOURCE | 0 |
A federal judge on Thursday blocked an Indiana law that would have banned abortions based solely on a fetus’s disability or genetic anomaly, suggesting that it was an illegal limit on a woman’s constitutional right. Judge Tanya Walton Pratt, of Federal District Court for Southern Indiana, also held up a state ban on abortions motivated solely by a fetus’s race or sex. In the preliminary injunction, Judge Pratt said limiting the reasons for an abortion was “inconsistent with the notion of a right rooted in privacy concerns and a liberty right to make independent decisions. ” While Judge Pratt’s injunction stops the law from taking immediate effect, and though she said the state would be unlikely to prevail at trial, the state can still defend the legislation. In a statement, the Indiana attorney general’s office said state lawyers would consider how to proceed and whether to appeal the injunction. Indiana would have been the first state to have a blanket ban on abortions based solely on race, sex or suspected disabilities, including evidence of Down syndrome. A handful of states have bans on abortion based on sex, one state has a ban based on race, and two have bans based on genetic anomalies, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit abortion rights group that tracks state laws. Judge Pratt’s decision, the first in a federal court to indicate that a ban on abortion because of genetic anomalies would likely be unconstitutional, is the latest setback for groups. It comes days after a landmark Supreme Court ruling in a Texas case that two other kinds of restrictions — requiring doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at local hospitals and imposing stringent standards on abortion clinics — are unconstitutional. The Texas measures would have forced many clinics to shut down. In language that is expected to echo nationally, the Supreme Court held in its Monday ruling that the benefits of any such restrictions must be closely scrutinized and weighed against the burdens on women’s access to abortion. Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement that “momentum from Monday’s landmark decision” was aiding in challenges to abortion restrictions in Indiana and elsewhere. “These unconstitutional laws punish women, and we will bring them down, law by law and state by state,” Ms. Richards said. “We have been fighting these restrictions on all fronts for years, organizing in the field, building for this moment — and now the wind is at our backs. ” Kara Brooks, a spokeswoman for Gov. Mike Pence, said in a statement on Thursday that the governor was “disappointed” in the ruling and “remains steadfast in his support for the unborn, especially those with disabilities. ” Judge Pratt’s decision was also criticized in a statement by Indiana Right to Life, which noted that the jurist had been nominated by President Obama. That group’s chief executive, Mike Fichter, said the ruling “denied the civil rights of unborn children” and was “an appalling human rights injustice. ” Thursday’s case in Indiana was argued long before the new Supreme Court decision, and Judge Pratt’s opinion made no reference to it. Her ruling rested largely on the argument that the state, as established in a series of cases starting with Roe v. Wade in 1973, cannot impede a woman’s right to decide to have an abortion until the fetus is viable outside the womb, usually at around 24 weeks. Judge Pratt said “irreparable harm” would have occurred had that part of the law taken effect as scheduled on Friday. “Difficult moral and complicated health decisions are made by women whose pregnancies are affected by a prenatal fetal anomaly,” Judge Pratt wrote in her ruling. “Given the relatively short time frame in which women may elect to terminate a pregnancy, even a short disruption of a woman’s ability to do so could have significant consequences. ” Indiana’s law, signed in March by Mr. Pence, was framed by abortion foes and legislative Republicans as a way to prevent discrimination in abortions, in particular the fetuses with Down syndrome. Mr. Pence, a Republican, said that he signed the law “with a prayer that God would continue to bless these precious children, mothers and families. ” But the local chapters of Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union challenged the measure, claiming the law posed an undue burden to women and restricted freedom of speech, and asking Judge Pratt for the preliminary injunction she issued on Thursday. That injunction also sets aside a portion of the law that imposed new restrictions for disposing of fetal remains. Indiana’s law was exceptional for its breadth, but the restrictions it included were not unprecedented. Such legislation has become more common and has gained traction in many statehouses. Dawn Johnsen, an Indiana University law professor who has pushed for abortion rights, said Thursday’s injunction was an important step toward invalidating such legislation. “It’s very strong reaffirmation of the constitutional right as the Supreme Court has interpreted it, but applied to new, creative, harmful restrictions,” Ms. Johnsen said. The Indiana measure had been controversial from the start, and Mr. Pence waited until his deadline before signing it into law. In the weeks that followed, abortion rights supporters rallied outside the Capitol against the law and started an online “Periods for Pence” campaign that encouraged women to tell the governor about their reproductive health. | 1 |
Posted on October 30, 2016 by Claire Bernish
Cannon Ball, N.D. — On Thursday, police from no less than five states sporting full riot gear and armed with heavy lethal and nonlethal weaponry, pepper spray, mace, a number of ATVs, five tanks, two helicopters, and military-equipped humvees showed up to tear down an encampment of Standing Rock Sioux water protectors and supporters armed with … nothing.
Under orders from the now-notorious Morton County Sheriff’s Office, this ridiculously heavy-handed standing army came better prepared to do battle than some actual military units fighting overseas.
But the target of their operation — a group of slightly more than 200 Native American water protectors and supporters opposing construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline — never intended to do battle with the armed, taxpayer-funded, corporate-backed, state-sponsored aggressors.
Reports vary, but no less than 141 people were arrested Thursday, and — according to witnesses — police marked numbers on arrestees’ arms and housed them in cement-floored dog kennels , without any padding, before they were transported as far away as Fargo.
“It goes back to concentration camp days,” asserted Oceti-Sakowin coordinator Mekasi Camp-Horinek, who, along with his mother, was marked and detained in a mesh kennel, reports the Los Angeles Times .
Although Thursday’s incident remained relatively peaceful for some time, with only shouts, chants, and occasional attempts by water protectors to convince this standing army to examine its motives and reconsider, clashes nonetheless broke out — solely because of gratuitous police aggression.
After facing off for a couple hours, these militant cops began closing in on the water protectors to shut down the Treaty of 1851 camp — in reference to the Fort Laramie Treaty of that year, which established a large parcel of land designated exclusively Native American territory not to be disturbed by the U.S. government. Prior to his arrest, Camp-Horinek had established the camp, stating, as cited by Indigenous Rising :
“Today, the Oceti Sakowin has enacted eminent domain on DAPL lands, claiming 1851 treaty rights. This is unceded land. Highway 1806 as of this point is blockaded. We will be occupying this land and staying here until this pipeline is permanently stopped. We need bodies and we need people who are trained in non-violent direct action. We are still staying non-violent and we are still staying peaceful.”
Despite the water protectors’ commitment to nonviolence, the militarized police response went as would be expected — horribly awry.
“A prayer circle of elders, including several women, was interrupted and all were arrested for standing peacefully on the public road,” stated a press release from Indigenous Environment Network. “A tipi was erected in the road and was recklessly dismantled, despite law enforcement statements that they would merely mark the tipi with a yellow ribbon and ask its owners to retrieve it. A group of water protectors was also dragged out of a sweat lodge ceremony erected in the path of the pipeline, thrown to the ground, and arrested.”
Claims to the contrary by Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier aside, Native American and Indigenous water protectors and supporters have refrained from violent acts on the whole, preferring instead peaceful prayer vigils and acts of civil disobedience.
No matter how peacefully the opposition acts, armed defenders of Big Oil interests seem determined to brutalize , disrespect, and generally incite and inflict violence against those who desire unsullied water for generations to come.
In fact, at the beginning of September, a private security firm hired by Energy Transfer Partners, the company responsible for pipeline construction, indiscriminately unleashed vicious attack dogs on water protectors, press, and supporters — for reasons as yet unknown.
During the savage attack, a pregnant woman, young girl, and many others suffered serious dog bites thanks to the ineptitude of the dogs’ handlers. Afterward, a warrant for inciting a riot was issued Democracy Now! journalist Amy Goodman — for doing her job, filming events as they happened — though charges were subsequently thrown out.
Although ETP and some law enforcement officers defended the barbarous actions of the private security mercenaries, the Guardian now reports that — because the guards lacked proper licensing — they could now face criminal charges. On Wednesday, the Morton County Sheriff’s Office made the determination that “dog handlers were not properly licensed to do security work in the state of North Dakota.”
Bob Frost, owner of Ohio-based Frost Kennels, told the Guardian , “All the proper protocols … were already done. I pulled my guys out the next day because we weren’t there to go to war with these protesters.”
Frost insisted he had cooperated with authorities investigating the incident — but the sheriff’s department disagrees. Seven handlers and dogs were deployed to the scene in early September, allegedly in response to reports of trespassers; but, according to the Guardian , police have only managed to identify two people.
The sheriff’s department claims Frost has not provided necessary information, and unnamed security officials cited in the report said that “there were no intentions of using the dogs or handlers for security work. … However, because of the protest events, the dogs were deployed as a method of trying to keep the protesters under control.”
In a statement cited by the Guardian , Morton County Captain Jay Gruebele said, “Although lists of security employees have been provided, there is no way of confirming whether the list is accurate or if names have been purposely withheld.”
Water protectors, in the meantime, are left to deal with absurdly disproportionate state violence — and the altogether unacceptable, disrespectful, and demeaning insult of being relegated to dog kennels after being arrested for exercising their rights.
As Lakota Country Times editor Brandon Ecoffey wrote in an editorial Thursday,
“Over the course of the last several months the abuse of detainees by Morton County Law Enforcement has overstepped every boundary guaranteed by the American constitution. Water protectors have been seen being bound and hooded by police. People are being stripped searched and abused within their jail for misdemeanor crimes. And police have employed the use of mass surveillance through drones on the protector camps. This isn’t a war zone this is North Dakota.” Don't forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks. Share this: | 0 |
Students at the University of Texas (UT) at Austin took to marching across their school campus in response to Tuesday’s election outcome. | 0 |
Under the cover of night, the family crowded into a wagon used to carry animals to flee the Nazi troops marching toward their hometown, Nalchik, in Russia. It was 1942, and Polina Davydova’s father had returned from war wounded and requiring crutches to walk. He was now orchestrating the family’s escape farther south, to Derbent, a city on the Caspian Sea. Fifteen family members were to leave. But after the journey began, Ms. Davydova’s grandmother counted heads — someone was missing. They called each person by name. When they reached Polina, no one answered. The girl was missing. The danger of turning back was so great that her grandmother suggested continuing without her. But her father refused. Throwing aside his crutches, he jumped from the wagon, hailing Soviet soldiers in trucks and begging them for a ride back to Nalchick. Just beyond the town’s borders, he found his daughter asleep on a suitcase. “I was my father’s favorite,” Ms. Davydova recently recalled, speaking in Russian through a translator. Ms. Davydova, now 77, often retells the family story of banding together. With a happy wistfulness, she speaks as though her father, mother, brothers, aunts, uncles, grandmother and cousins, who are all now gone, are back together, shuttling everyone toward safety. Inside her sparsely decorated apartment on Ocean Avenue near Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn, the few items there remind her of her home country. A mezuza hangs by the door, providing a blessing for peace to all who enter, according to family tradition. The walls are lined with a hamesh, which includes a rock from Israel pictures of Jerusalem and needlework from before her eyesight worsened. On a warm September day, sitting at a table in her living room, Ms. Davydova pored over family photographs and Jewish history books, one of which includes the only remaining photograph of her father. Pointing to the picture, she recounts the atrocities that befell her hometown following the family’s escape to Derbent. Relatives who had refused to leave were tortured by fascists in their homes, forced by soldiers to walk over broken glass with their bare feet. “If we hadn’t left, maybe this would have happened to us,” Ms. Davydova said. “My father saved our lives. ” In January 1943, the Soviet Army pushed into Nalchik and freed the city, allowing her family to return home. The family’s furniture had been stolen, belongings destroyed. “But it didn’t matter,” Ms. Davydova said. “We had returned to our own roof, our own home. ” Still, sentiment persisted. When factory workers began to cut through a cemetery in 1969, Ms. Davydova’s father gathered other members of his synagogue to raise money to build a fence. Angered by the fence, the factory workers beat her father’s chest with a large metal cross, she said, puncturing a lung, which contributed to his death two months later. “There were many years of fear,” she said. “Such fear — you can’t imagine. ” For 31 years Ms. Davydova was a preschool teacher in Russia. Afraid of the continued and that her son, Boris, would be deployed to Afghanistan, Ms. Davydova and Boris sneaked out of Russia in 1992. They took only two suitcases, leaving everything else behind to give the illusion that they were only going away for a brief vacation. She arrived in the United States with only $25 and a tourist visa. Arriving as a guest of her brother, who was already in America, she settled in Brooklyn, but Ms. Davydova was unable to legally work while she waited five years to be granted political asylum status, which she received in 1997. She was granted citizenship five years after that, in 2002. Even after she received the status, Ms. Davydova, who does not speak English fluently, struggled to obtain steady work and started making frequent trips to the hospital because of declining health. The medical bills added up, and after several years of heart problems, she underwent heart surgery in 2008 for a blocked artery. She suffers from low blood pressure and frequent fainting spells. She pays $900 a month in rent, and receives $820 in Supplemental Security Income and $194 monthly in food stamps. Her family helps her pay the bills when they are able. Help also came in the form of the Edith and Carl Marks Jewish Community House of Bensonhurst, a beneficiary agency of of New York, one of the eight organizations supported by The New York Times Neediest Cases Fund. Marks JCH, a beneficiary agency of of New York, provided Ms. Davydova with $1, 004 to cover one month’s rent and utilities in February 2016. “I gave my life to that country,” she said of Russia. “And I didn’t do anything in this country, but I want to kiss America because everything I have in this life comes from people in this country helping me. ” | 1 |
on November 3, 2016 12:22 am ·
Donald Trump’s deplorable supporters aren’t waiting for the election results to start spilling blood.
They’ve been threatening bloody violence ever since Trump began claiming that the election is “rigged” in favor of Hillary Clinton. And Trump has called for them to intimidate voters at polling places.
In Texas last week, a Trump supporter was arrested for electioneering at a polling place because he was wearing one of Trump’s stupid hats and a “Deplorables” T-shirt to vote.
Election code prohibits any person from electioneering within 100 feet of a polling place.
Of course, Trump supporters threw a temper tantrum because they think the rules don’t apply to them.
Well, now it looks like they have retaliated by setting up a booby trapped Trump sign at a polling place knowing that an official or volunteer would have to take the sign down.
At Collin College in Plano, Texas a Trump sign was discovered zip-tied to an official polling location sign in direct violation of the election code that forbids electioneering at polling places.
But when a volunteer went out to remove the sign they got a nasty surprise in the form of box cutter blades that were strategically hidden inside. The blades sliced into the volunteer’s hands and drew blood, requiring medical attention and prompting officials to order that signs be checked thoroughly before removal.
“It just shows how far we have come in politics where people want to be so mean and so hateful to try and injure somebody who’s probably not got any political party persuasion one way or the other,” local Democratic Party campaign chair Steve Spainhouer said in response . “I think most people have already made their minds up at this point how they’re going to vote and so there’s nothing to gain by being mean spirited or hateful.”
Here’s the video via KTVT .
Frankly, this should be considered an act of domestic terrorism. Trump’s supporters have gone too far and it could get worse as Election Day approaches. And if Trump loses, his supporters have already threatened to try to overthrow the federal government in a bloody coup.
Clearly, these people are deranged and the safety of voters and election officials are in danger. But you won’t hear Donald Trump condemning this act of violence. After all, he is the one inciting it.
Featured Image: Darren McCollester/Getty Images Share this Article! | 0 |
There has been rioting in the streets of every major city of the United States after the US presidential election and all of the governors have declared states of emergency. As you’re heading home from work, a presidential announcement is made that martial law has been declared, and the US government has temporarily suspended your rights under the Constitution. An executive order demanding the turn-in of all firearms has been signed and placed into effect. The federal government with the aid of local police departments and other state law enforcement agencies is now confiscating the firearms door-to-door.
You’ve been catching all of this in a radio broadcast as the announcer in a faltering voice also states that the US is on the brink of war. As you turn off the main highway, listening to the news and heading home, you notice that there are a number of vehicles…about a half dozen black blazers and several police cars…parked outside of your house with federal agents pounding on your front door. The S has hit the fan, and it looks as if you might have to skip dinner. You drive by without stopping, only to see the road blocked off about 200 feet down and similar operations occurring at your neighbors’ homes. Parking your car off the shoulder, you grab your backpack and supplies from the vehicle. It’s time to run.
Read part 1 of Mantracker here
It is the hope of all decent people that such events do not occur. But what if they do? It’s time to make a getaway and not play around with the semantics or second guess any longer. This is just one reason out of innumerable that you may be on the run and the hunt has begun. Now is the time to focus your energies on getting away. Let’s cover some of the basics and finer points now, in this article to prepare you for bleak circumstances such as the outlined scenario.
Basic Escape and Evade Techniques Part of your E & E , your Escape and Evasion is going to depend on how much notice you receive before you are actually being pursued. The situation above is a bleak one: the hunted individual is about to be stripped of all of his belongings and equipment. He must now retreat from what was to be his retreat and cut his losses.
1. Know the area of your immediate E&E Urban , suburban , or rural , you have to focus on cover and concealment. Cover physically protects you (in varying degrees) from gunfire. Concealment may provide cover, but primarily it obstructs or prevents your pursuers/attackers from seeing you. In an urban or suburban area, it is difficult to slip undetected into the woodline, due to the higher population density and the scarcity of woods. Have you pre-planned a hide location until you can escape the populated area under cover of darkness? Do you have some maps to aid you in your endeavors?
6 laws of survival
How to create a bug out plan
A rural area is a better start. The woods can hide you, support you, and shelter you if you know how to use them. When you enter the woods, you want to stay off any main paths or trails and “bust brush” as much as possible.
2. Keep your signature low, and cover your tracks When you’re “busting brush,” you want to move through the woods and thickets through the paths of least resistance, taking care not to break off branches or step into places that leave a noticeable (and trackable) sign, such as a dried, muddy creek bed or open area with snow on the ground. You can take a stout pine branch with needles (green is best) to brush away signs of your passage akin to a broom. Make sure you take the branch off of the direction of your travel, so the trackers don’t see a branch removed from the tree. Move stealthily and with a purpose, don’t just stagger through the brush with your emotions getting the best of you. Focus and concentrate on taking care with each step, yet don’t move as slowly as a sloth.
3. Don’t make tracks if possible One method is to take two heavy trash bags and place a good quantity of leaves and twigs in them. Take two to three sticks and lash them to the bottoms of your shoes/boots. Stepping into the bags, tie them off around your feet up by the instep. This will break up the pattern of your boot-print and enlarge the surface area of your tread…spreading your weight out to prevent you from making a track. You’ll have to fix and adjust the bags periodically. The thick contractor-type bags are the best that can take the wear. Don’t walk all over or step over things such as a moss-covered log that will show you’ve stepped there.
4. Move at night after the initial escape Once you’ve put some distance between yourself and the pursuer(s), wait until it’s dark before you travel again. This is as the situation dictates, depending on how badly they want you. It may be necessary to flee and postpone that normal wait time until it’s dark out of urgency. When moving at night, be aware of the moon and the amount of light that is on you. Cover up exposed portions of the skin, both to protect your body and to shield you from reflecting any light.
5. Mask your smell Mud, dirt, and other “stuff” can be rubbed all over you to help conceal your scent, as dogs may come into play. If you wear cologne or any other fragrance, wash it off when the opportunity presents itself from a stream or creek.
6. Dogs could be your worst nightmare A tracking dog can present a problem. Bleach or cayenne pepper can help to throw those dogs off the scent. Another thing you can prep in advance is skunk scent. You see one as a roadkill? Remove the glands and store them in an airtight container, glass is best. Later you can use this either through diluting (a container with water and a little of the gland/musk added to the container), and then spreading it in the area the dogs will travel. The more the merrier.
Rule: You don’t beat the dog; you beat the handler . If you come to a fence? Happy Birthday, especially if the fence is a long one that’s high. Chain-link is the best. Where you can, cross the fence. When you’re across run down about 30-40 feet, and then re-cross it, going back to the first side. Run another 30-40 feet, and then climb across again. Do this over and over again, the whole length of the fence. Take care when you cross over it not to run right along it…go out and away from the fence, perpendicular to it by about 10-15 feet, and then come back in at the end of 30-40 feet.
The dog will have to keep the trail, and the handler will have to put the dog(s) over the fence, and then climb over to follow…the handler will be half dead after about a couple hundred feet of this.
The real art is at the end of the fence to take a “hide” sight, watch where they appear, double back, and then go across from the first (original) crossing point on the fence, and head on a 90-degree angle away from all of it. That’ll kill them.
With dogs, take ‘em on a “joy ride” and give them plenty of fairly steep rocks to climb, hills to traverse, and bust through brush and stickers the whole time…this will give the dogs a hard time and half kill the handler. It’s up to you if you want to ambush them when they’re most tired or when you see the opportunity.
Take out the handler or handlers first. The dogs are not your enemy: they’re a tool in the hands of men who know how to use them. You should be armed: the 2 nd Amendment gives you the permission, and it’s up to you to actually use it…it is one of your rights. Use your own judgment as to whether to take out the dogs or not. Don’t forget to capitalize on the resources the handler may have left you when you deal with him. A radio might come in handy for the cross-chatter, and you may also have more equipment and tools.
7. Areas to avoid while fleeing Open areas are an invite to be picked up, or to be seen from even a tremendous distance. Skirt the woodline, staying back within it by at least 30 to 50 feet. Bodies of water should only be crossed when you must. Don’t worry…the dogs can pick up your trail on the other side, and maybe even better when you’re dripping water all over the place. Tunnels are death-traps; stay out of them at all cost, especially man-made tunnels. Better to walk another ¼ mile than enter a concrete tunnel where even a ricochet bullet from a pursuer may find its mark. Stay away from all human habitations and avoid any main roads or built-up areas with a lot of human traffic.
8. They know your needs and have the edge (so they think) You have to drink, eat, and sleep. They know it. They can work in shifts, and have the manpower to continue the search uninterrupted. You must eat on the move, drink on the move, and sleep in “bursts” that give you enough time to rest, yet ample time as they move closer to you.
9. Use every means at your disposal You have to get away, or you can end up in a FEMA camp , a prison, or worse. Live off of the land …that’s why you have been studying and training so much…it has to be in preparation for the worst-case scenario and this is it! You’ll have to feed yourself from the rivers and streams , shield any fire that you may use, construct camouflage lean-to’s and “spider holes” to hide in. You also need to plan on where you’re eventually going to go to completely evade the pursuers and give them the slip. Adapt, overcome, and survive .
10. Know their relentlessness Look at guys such as Eric Rudolph and the Unabomber. They’ll hound you to the very corners of hell, and for decades. When does it end? It never ends…just as your preparations never truly end.
In the type of scenario that we just outlined at the beginning of this article, it ends when we have restored the Constitution of the United States to its primacy as the law of the land. It ends when we can form a government of the people, by the people, and for the people that governs with such a mindset. It ends when we can be safe and secure with our neighbors and our own family members…not having to constantly look over our shoulder to see if “Big Brother” is watching you.
Therefore, in reality, it never ends. Even in times of good, you must always be vigilant that things do not take a turn for the worse and denigrate into what we have now. Nothing is new under the sun. We have seen such times before and we’ll see them again. Prepare yourself mentally and physically for the challenges ahead of you, and keep fighting that good fight…one day at a time. JJ out!
Jeremiah Johnson is the Nom de plume of a retired Green Beret of the United States Army Special Forces (Airborne). Mr. Johnson was a Special Forces Medic, EMT and ACLS-certified, with comprehensive training in wilderness survival, rescue, and patient-extraction. He is a Certified Master Herbalist and a graduate of the Global College of Natural Medicine of Santa Ana, CA. A graduate of the U.S. Army’s survival course of SERE school (Survival Evasion Resistance Escape), Mr. Johnson also successfully completed the Montana Master Food Preserver Course for home-canning, smoking, and dehydrating foods.
Mr. Johnson dries and tinctures a wide variety of medicinal herbs taken by wild crafting and cultivation, in addition to preserving and canning his own food. An expert in land navigation, survival, mountaineering, and parachuting as trained by the United States Army, Mr. Johnson is an ardent advocate for preparedness, self-sufficiency, and long-term disaster sustainability for families. He and his wife survived Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. Cross-trained as a Special Forces Engineer, he is an expert in supply, logistics, transport, and long-term storage of perishable materials, having incorporated many of these techniques plus some unique innovations in his own homestead.
Mr. Johnson brings practical, tested experience firmly rooted in formal education to his writings and to our team. He and his wife live in a cabin in the mountains of Western Montana with their three cats.
This information has been made available by Ready Nutrition
Originally published November 14th, 2016 How Your Guard Dog Security Could Easily Be Compromised ManTracker: How to Be One and How to Avoid One How To Navigate Using the Sun and Stars A Green Beret’s Guide to Improvised Home Defense, Part Land Navigation: Finding Your Way in an Urban Environment… | 0 |
After the release of a WikiLeaks email chain from March 2015 on Tuesday in which a top Clinton aide admitted President Barack Obama falsely claimed he did not know about Hillary Clinton’s private server use while she was secretary of state, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest sprung into action to deny that the president had lied about the issue.
“What the president said was an entirely factual response,” Earnest said to a group of reporters in Los Angeles where Obama was attending Democratic fundraisers.
Earnest then attempted to explain away all criticism of the president’s actions as mere conspiracies.
Related Stories Hannity Proposes A Sendoff For Obama In The Event Of A Trump Presidency WikiLeaks: Podesta Said Obamas ‘Don’t Need To Be This Nice’ To President Bush And First Lady WikiLeaks Reveals Obama Knew About Clinton’s Emails; ‘Clean This Up’ “I recognize that some of the president’s critics have attempted to construct some type of conspiracy about the communication between the president and the secretary of state,” he said.
He continued, “But they’ve failed to put forward a conspiracy that withstands any scrutiny, so I guess they are back to recycling thoroughly debunked conspiracies.”
Obama himself denied any knowledge of the server, telling CBS reporter Bill Plante in March 2015, just after the server revelations that he learned of the Clinton’s private email server “the same time everybody else learned it through news reports.”
Several days after the server revelations in March 2015, Earnest told the press that Obama knew about Clinton’s email address and had sent messages to it but knew nothing about a private server.
He reiterated that position on Tuesday.
“The president did trade emails with Secretary Clinton, not a large number of them,” Earnest said.
“Of course the president had possession of Secretary Clinton’s email address, but he did not have any knowledge of where her server was located or what sort of arrangements had been made to store her email.”
Trending Stories Frustrated With Media Bias, Trump Campaign Takes Its Case Directly To Voters With Nightly Show On Facebook Independent Voters Push Trump To The Front In Florida And Ohio RNC Official Takes CNN Host To Task For Claiming There Is No Media Bias However, the Wikileaks email chain – which Earnest referred to as “stolen” and therefore illegitimate – tells a different story, with top Clinton aides seemingly in a panic that it could come to light that the president was lying when he said he did not know about Clinton’s private server.
“[L]ooks like POTUS just said he found out HRC was using her personal email when he saw it in the news,” Clinton spokesman Josh Schwerin said in a March 7, 2015 email published Tuesday by WikiLeaks.
“[W]e need to clean this up – he has emails from her – they do not say state.gov,” responded former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills.
What do you think? | 0 |
PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel has received tons of criticism for his wayward support of Donald Trump, and is coming under fire even more for his recent donation of $1.25 million to Trump’s... | 0 |
Saudi Finance Minister Al Assaf Fired On Royal Orders Source: Zero Hedge
While mostly taking place behind the scenes, it has been a rather calamitous month for developments in Saudi Arabia: one day before the record, inaugural $17.5 billion Saudi bond priced, news broke that for the first time, a member of the Saudi Royal Family, had been executed for murder in what until then had been an unprecedented fall from grace for a member of the chosen royal elite.
The very next day, as virtually everyone in the bond market knows, Saudi Arabia priced a massively oversubcribed - the first of its kind - international bond issue , taking advantage of rising oil prices on the back of Saudi jawboning about an OPEC production freeze deal which now appears unreachable (oil is down 4% as of this moment). The deal was seen by most as a major success for the Kingdom, one whose proceeds the local authorities had started to spend just as soon as the wire transfers were executed to get thousands of government staffers back to work .
So it is perhaps quite surprising that less than 2 weeks after this historic bond sale, moments ago we learned thatthe long-serving Saudi finance minister had been relieved of his post on Royal orders .
As Al Jazeera reports, Saudi Arabia's King Salman Bin Abdulaziz issued a Royal decree to appoint Mohammed Al-Jadaan as the new finance minister on Monday to replace Ibrahim Abdulaziz Al-Assaf.
Saudi Arabia's Finance Minister Ibrahim Abdulaziz Al Assaf speaks to the media
Jaddan had previously been the chairman of the Saudi Capital Market Authority . He replaces Ibrahim Alassaf, who has been appointed minister of state and a member of the council of ministers, according to the royal decree.
While details of the transition are scarce, and it is unclear how Al-Assaf displeased the Saudi King, this is further evidence that a major power struggle is taking place behind the scenes, and whereas the terminated finmin should have been commended for his bond sale, the fact that he is being punished suggests that there is significiant infighting in the royal family, which will likely result in even more financial and political fallout for Saudi Arabia in the coming year, especially if oil continues its recent decline. | 0 |
Financial Markets , Market Manipulation , U.S. Economy Clinton Foundation , FBI warrant , investigation of Hillary , James Comey FBI , Weiner laptop admin
Stewart Dougherty presents the 2nd part of his disembowelment of the Clinton crime machine. The Weiner email bomb dropped in the middle of this. As it turns out, the Weiner lap-top mishap appears to a “Black Swan” of sorts that eluded Hillary’s tentacles of control. In the piece below, Stewart presents useful background knowledge and intellectual tools with which to help you analyze and interpret the next sequence of events before and after the election (assuming the election is not postponed).
The information that emerges from the Weiner laptop is going to blow people’s minds – John Titus, Best Evidence Productions, in an upcoming Shadow of Truth
Author’s Preface: We are far more interested in markets than politics. To us, free markets represent liberty in motion. But today, politics, and particularly the most corrupt political institution on earth, the Federal Reserve, have markets in a hammer-lock. At this point, we have to understand what is happening in politics in order to understand what is likely to happen in markets. We write a great deal about politics at this critical juncture in order to help you understand markets and achieve the financial freedom you desire and deserve.
Regarding the breaking Clinton-scandal developments, we believe that in addition to the 650,000 emails retrieved from the Abedin / Weiner computer which are going to show a level of corruption in this nation never before even imagined let alone proved, the FBI’s decision to re-open the investigation was related to the Bundy acquittals on October 27, 2016. We believe that government officials are looking up the barrel of a full-blown American revolution. Not the shooting kind, but rather something much worse for them: complete moral rejection of government and Establishment corruption by the PRODUCTIVE CLASS in America, which threatens to rapidly spread into and cripple the American economy just ahead of the holiday selling season.
The National Retail Federation has just reported that 25% of shoppers are waiting for the election outcome prior to deciding how much they are going to spend during the holidays, something the NRF has never seen before. If principled, productive people feel that this election was stolen from them by Clinton and Establishment corruption, they are going to shut down. They are going to WITHDRAW THEIR FINANCIAL CONSENT from a rigged, dirty system that is looting them and destroying their futures. While the government can effectively deal with many kinds of protest, it cannot even begin to deal with a general economic boycott by the productive class, even if it is just at the margin. (All profits are at the margin.) The consequences of such a boycott upon general business activity; tax receipts at all levels from municipal to federal; the stock and bond markets; and the national mood, with its extraordinarily complex and critical interconnections and ramifications would be monumental, and perhaps beyond all American precedent.
Despite a multi-million dollar, taxpayer-funded Federal legal onslaught in the case against the Bundy’s and their co-defendants, the jurors re-confirmed something communicated throughout history. Namely, that while there are a very few things that universally disgust human beings, one of them is bullies. The people are not pleased, and the Establishment knows it is in trouble. Now on to our article.]
The Clinton Syndrome Curse: A Clinton – Obama Co-Presidency. (The Clinton Syndrome: Part 2)
In Part 1, we defined the Clinton Syndrome as a psychological condition in which voters develop a favorable attitude toward a political predator who deceives, disdains, swindles and abuses them. It is a variant of the Stockholm Syndrome, but much larger in scope and scale, as demonstrated by the fact that tens of millions of American voters currently exhibit the pathological condition. This Syndrome was identified by Inferential Analytics (IA), an accurate and reliable forecasting method we have developed and use. You can read a detailed explanation of the syndrome in our first article on the subject: “The Clinton Syndrome: The Establishment’s Weapon for National Conquest (Part 1)” LINK
In this article, Part 2, we delve deeper into what the 2016 presidential election is really all about, and outline the consequences that will occur should the Clinton Syndrome prevail on November 8 th . The Clinton Syndrome has resulted in a potentially deadly national disease which will wreak havoc if it spreads out of control at this time.
We regard as an existential threat to the United States the fact that tens of millions of American voters have no idea how deeply fraudulent the entire 2016 presidential campaign has been, from the very beginning. If Donald Trump had not appeared out of nowhere, this would never have been an election at all, but rather an orchestrated, planned enablement of the Clintons and their Establishment handlers to engage in unprecedented corruption, regime change and outright plunder.
If successful, this still-active effort to fraudulently inject the Clintons into the power seat will become a multi-trillion dollar gift to the Establishment elite who know exactly how to profit from Clinton graft and corruption; will destroy what is left of the American economy, which simply cannot sustain four more years of intense looting and fraud; and will result in the outright overthrow of the American form of governance by a deadly new political system that we call “crony communism (outlined in our article: Crony Communism: Hillary Clinton’s Game Plan for America. LINK
The people have been so confused and deceived by the multi-billion dollar avalanche of deliberately concocted lies and propaganda about this election that they don’t even know who is running for President on the Democrat ticket.
Hillary Clinton has both a co-presidential and a vice presidential running mate, neither of which is Tim Kaine, a corrupt political suck-up and hack who was selected precisely because he will do exactly what he is told, not matter how criminal or immoral.
Clinton’s co-presidential running mate is Barack Hussein Obama; her vice-presidential candidate is the United Nations. This is the Establishment’s Dream Team, cooked up to make the fastest possible progress toward their crony-communist and globalist overthrow of the United States. The Establishment realizes that the people are waking up fast to what is being done to them and their country. Therefore, they have put their corrupt machinations into high gear in order to beat the clock, which is ticking loudly.
When people say that a vote for Clinton means four more years of Obama, they have their arithmetic wrong. A Clinton victory means eight more years of Obama in the next four, and a total knock-out for the nation.
The Mainstream Media’s (MSM) deliberately false narrative is that Obama has been campaigning non-stop for Clinton because he wants to protect his “legacy,” and believes that Clinton will do this for him.
This is yet another of the “Big Lie” mind bombs that have been dropped onto the American people’s heads during this colossally fraudulent, dishonest and propagandistic Establishment onslaught to get Clinton elected.
This narrative is meant to suggest that Barrack Obama wants to retire, and then ride out the rest of his life looking upon his “legacy.”
There are two problems with this story. First, Obama’s legacy is already blowing up in his and the entire nation’s face, so there is nothing Clinton will be able to do to salvage it. Obamacare and the Iran Deal are just two examples among dozens of the collapse of Obama’s so-called legacy, which would much better be called a national damnation.
The second problem is that Obama is only 55 years old and has not given even ONE indication our model can detect that he actually wants or intends to retire. (Soros, one of his champions, is 86 years old and still wreaking havoc worldwide. These people never stop until the Reaper drops in.) In fact, what we see in Obama is the exact opposite: he demonstrates a strong desire not only to remain on the political stage, but to assume a larger presence upon it.
Speaking at a rally in Philadelphia on September 13, 2016 (while Hillary was at home recovering from “pneumonia”), Obama said, “It’s good to be back on the campaign trail.” He then said, “I really, really, REALLY want to elect Hillary Clinton.” (Please carefully consider that sentence, because it is a textbook example (although just one of hundreds over the years) of Obama’s pathological Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). He did not say, “I really, really, REALLY want YOU [the people to whom he was speaking] to elect Hillary Clinton,” but rather, “I really, really, REALLY want to elect Hillary Clinton,” making the people’s national election all about himself. Comments such as this are extraordinarily important to our analysis, and their significance has been borne out time and again over our 15+ years of doing this work. Paradoxically, the smallest factors often have the greatest implications.
Later in the same speech, Obama boasted (our comments added within brackets): “More Americans are working [in part time, minimum wage jobs], more have [100% subsidized] health care, incomes are rising [for the establishment elite], poverty is falling [according to false, politically doctored numbers] and gas is $2.00 a gallon. Thanks, Obama!!!” In Obama’s narcissistically crippled mind, the entire United States economy is a function of one thing and one thing only: him. Narcissists in positions of power are extremely destructive (e.g. Obamacare), because they are completely out of touch with what is happening in the real, as opposed their self-flattering fantasy world. In any event, this kind of campaign bragging, swagger and grandiosity is not indicative of someone who plans to retire from politics in the next few weeks.
Obama’s clear desire to remain in the game makes him valuable to Clinton, while also making Clinton valuable to him. Intersecting motives are where deals get done. And a Clinton – Obama collaboration would be ideal for the Establishment. Obama has been the gift that keeps on giving to the elite, as they have raked in trillions from his presidency. They want as much of Obama as they can get, because he is a money machine. (For example, witness Obama’s continuing efforts to ram the TPP, an Establishment fraud against the people, down the nation’s throat. Obama does whatever the Establishment tells him to do, in the full knowledge his “Library” Slush Fund will be richly rewarded for his efforts, just as the Clinton Slush Fund has been enriched by more than $1.8 billion, with a “b,” for the Clinton sell-out of people to the elite.)
Obama is the most internationally-traveled president in the nation’s history, having made 51 international trips to 56 different countries during his two terms in office. It is as if he has been running for international office, and now we can see that he has been. His globetrotting has required strength, stamina and energy, the exact physical attributes that Clinton, who has been pictured requiring assistance to climb a short set of stairs, lacks. Given her health issues, Clinton cannot possibly perform on a global stage going forward; she will be lucky to successfully navigate the White House.
This presents a problem. For the Establishment agenda to be fully executed, Clinton needs international support, and ideally, that international mandates be imposed upon the United States. But she will not be capable of traveling internationally to seal the deals that must get done.
This is where Obama comes in. While he would never step “backwards” into a role such as, for example, Secretary of State (an ego-wounding demotion), his passion for continued political involvement would find an excellent home at the United Nations.
In this Inferential Analytics scenario, Hillary Clinton will get Obama placed in a high level United Nations position. The United States pays for roughly 25% of total United Nations annual budget, far more than any other nation, and still has clout even though more and more countries are turning their backs on America.
Other nations would support the idea of a senior role for Obama if it were made clear to them that his mission would be to continue the “fundamental transformation” of the United States that he promised during his 2008 campaign and has been conducting ever since. This “transformation” has done extreme damage to the United States, and while it has been a disaster for America, it has been good for the rest of the world. Finally, they see a means by which to bring the United States to heel. The idea of the further weakening of the United States will sound to them like a very good deal. The one assurance they will seek is that in exchange for giving Obama an important role at the U.N., Obama will get Clinton to agree not to incinerate the northern hemisphere in a nuclear war, at least not until they have finalized their preparations for it.
A Clinton – Obama co-presidency will be a double body-blow to the nation, with Clinton turning it into a corrupt, crony-communist Establishment lootocracy from within, and Obama destroying it from without.
Leveraging the United Nations, Clinton and Obama can effect two personal agendas they have long sought: gun control, and a multi-million person “open borders” invasion of America. The first agenda will disarm the people, which has been Job #1 in every communist takeover in history; the second will ensure that the “Last American Presidential Election” occurs on November 8, 2016. In the future, presidents and all other politicians and government agency heads will be appointed by the Establishment, exactly as happens in communist regimes. While there might be “show elections,” the outcomes will have been pre-determined at every level far in advance.
A Clinton – Obama co-presidency will also ensure that other Establishment objectives are met. These include the institution of carbon taxes (an enormous and unprecedented new revenue source and looting opportunity); the passage of the TPP (an Establishment bonanza); and the maximum-possible imposition of the New World Order regime change agenda upon the nations and their people.
While Obama could advance the Establishment’s aims in virtually any high level position at the U.N., a role that would make him particularly deadly at the outset would be Co-chair of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), joining current head Filippo Grandhi.
Obama could make his appointment a matter of smooth sailing by stating his belief that the United States is a large, wealthy, relatively under-populated nation that could rapidly absorb a large number of immigrants. By promising to tap into the country’s private wealth, Obama could warrant that all new immigrants would be fully covered by the country’s comprehensive welfare system upon arrival, which is exactly what happens today. This idea would be intoxicating to the new Secretary General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, who was the former head of the UNHCR and is an avowed socialist.
The United Nations currently reports the existence of more than 60,000,000 displaced persons and refugees in the world. If the United States pledged to take in, say, 5,000,000 of them, senior U.N. officials would be delighted. What would they have to lose? Dealing with the integration and cost issues would be America’s problem, not theirs. The U.N. could pass a resolution, written by Obama in such a way as to make it convertible into an Executive Order by Clinton, mandating the acceptance of these refugees by the United States. Clinton would put up her hands and say, “I didn’t do it. The U.N. did it, and we must do our “fair share,” while also complying with international law and being decent and responsible international citizens.”
As we have pointed out in the past, the United States government is irredeemably bankrupt by any accounting definition one wishes to use. With $20,000,000,000,000.00 in on-the-books debt, another $10,000,000,000,000.00 in debt projected to be added over the next decade (it will be far greater than this, given current trends), and at the very minimum another $120,000,000,000,000.00 in unfunded debt and contingent liabilities, there is absolutely no way the government can ever pay its obligations. So you might wonder, how could the government possibly pay for an immigrant invasion of this magnitude?
The answer is, the government won’t pay for it; the people will. This is what crony communism is all about. It is estimated that today, there is roughly $70 trillion in private wealth in America. Assuming that half of it, or $35 trillion belongs to the cronies and is off-limits, this leaves $35 trillion that is available for expropriation and looting. While this is certainly not enough to fix America’s fiscal problems, not even close, it could fund 4 years’ worth of radical fiscal adventurism as well as crony communism regime change.
As Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said during this campaign, “We are going to go where the money is,” and if you don’t take that statement seriously, we believe you are making a very big mistake. She and top colleagues such as Sanders and Warren have said in plain English, at a high decibel level that they are coming for your money, and they are, because in their minds, you don’t deserve to have any. Just as Obama once famously said, in a rare, honest, off-script, non-tele-prompted moment, “If you have a business, you didn’t build that,” he and his fellow crony communists also believe, “If you have saved some after-tax money, you don’t deserve to have that.” To them, any savings you possess represent funds the government should have gotten its hands in the first tax cycle, but didn’t. They intend to rectify that error going forward.
We have outlined this theme to demonstrate that this election is about an agenda that very few people understand, because it has deliberately been withheld from them. In actuality, the voters have no idea what Clinton truly stands for, or what the Establishment agenda, which she fully believes in and will implement, really is. The stakes in this election are therefore greater than those of any other election in our nation’s history, in our view. This is why the Establishment has spent billions of dollars rigging it. They intend to collect trillions in plunder on the other side, but they can only do so if it goes their way. As we have already seen, they will stop at nothing to get what they want.
Some Implications of a Clinton – Obama Co-presidency:
Here is a snapshot of the forecast generated by IA in the event of a Clinton – Obama victory: The Clinton – Obama Co-presidential regime will be the most secretive and non-transparent presidency in U.S. history. Clinton will become invisible, just as she often has during the campaign, not just for health reasons, but because she will turn her back on everyday citizens, whom she disdains, once she gets the prize she has sought her entire life. Obama will make secret deals all over the world (think of the secret Iran cash payments and deal, and his behind-the-scenes agitating for TPP, but on a much larger scale, as illustrations). Every one of these deals will be a dagger in the nation’s back. The American people will never again know the truth about what actually goes on behind government doors, or about the corruption that infects the entire political and establishment system. The political class will never again allow itself to suffer Wikileaks-like exposure. Politics will shift to a CIA-like “need to know” model, where information is doled out selectively and in piece-parts. Only a very few at the top will know the overall agenda, and the full set of tactics being employed to achieve it. Anyone who compromises or exposes the system will simply be executed. (Seth Rich comes to mind.) Going forward, the people will know absolutely nothing about what is really happening in Washington, D.C., or about the D.C. / Wall Street and Establishment initiatives. Orwell’s prophecy, “1984,” which is already quite real, will become even more so. The United States will experience an accelerating Brain Drain. Forward-thinking people will realize that America’s slide into predatory crony-communism can and will never be reversed, and that it will be impossible for them and their loved ones to get ahead in such a corrupt, suffocating environment. (Imagine being scolded, lectured, insulted and talked down to on a regular basis by people like Clinton, Obama and Warren, because that is exactly what will happen.) Progressive countries will put out the welcome mat for hard-working, principled, skilled, entrepreneurial Americans. No one will want America’s whining, lazy, non-productive, “entitled” mooches. That’s just a fact. Virtually every nation anyone would actually want to move to for a better opportunity grades potential immigrants according to age, education, language proficiency, skills and likelihood to be productive. Prospects are disqualified if they do not earn a sufficient score. No sensible nation on earth wants to bring in do-nothings whose only capability is to leech off its producers. Productive Americans who remain in the country for their own reasons will quietly adopt a John Galt mindset, sidestepping the corruption and crony communist expropriation by shutting down, dropping out and fading off the radar screen. This will result in an immediate slow-down of business activity, which will ultimately lead to economic collapse. Given that all profits are at the margin, relatively small percentage declines in sales can entirely wipe out income. The John Galt effect will result in the collapse of the nation’s many Ponzi schemes, such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, pensions (government and private) and the biggest one of all, Government Debt. These schemes simply cannot be maintained in a dramatically slowing business environment, no matter how much private wealth is looted. Government will take draconian steps to shut down all non-government-sanctioned news and information outlets. Their prime target will be the Alternative Media, which will only be further empowered, and embraced by the people. A powerful Resistance movement will spread like wildfire. Nonetheless, people should fill their minds with as much truth as they possibly can right now, because it will become much harder and more expensive to find in the future. Today’s Alternative Media is the greatest gift any people in history have ever received, and people should leverage it as best they can while they can. A steady retreat by government officials and establishment elitists to their multi-trillions of dollars’ worth of taxpayer-funded bunkers will occur, as they seek to hide from the American people, who will be waking up by the additional tens of thousands every day. A Federal Reserve December rate hike has a 0% chance of happening if Clinton is elected; there is a 100% chance of a rate hike if Trump is elected. The Fed is a totally political organization, and they will do everything they can to punish the voters and scorch the economic earth if the people choose Trump over the Establishment agenda the Fed has been 100% behind. If Clinton wins, people will IMMEDIATELY be bombarded with MSM reports about the implications of the 2016 election upon the 2018 mid-term and 2020 general elections. This will be part of a full-scale effort to inject mass quantities of Hopium into the Trump supporters’ brains, and get them to focus not upon the rigged election of 2016, but on the “next” election where, they will falsely be told, their vote will “really count!” In the meantime, the Establishment will be doing everything necessary to ensure that the 2018 and 2020 “elections” are completely rigged, fraudulent and meaningless. A massive move into real money will begin, and this will be the subject of our next article. There are developments in this sphere that you must know about, and one of the most important Inferential Analytics themes we have ever examined was triggered on October 27, 2016. We will have a full description in the next week or so.
In conclusion, the 2016 election is an existential event for the United States. W believe that the situation is becoming so unstable that you have little time to do everything you can to prepare, and get your personal houses in order. We are writing to help as best we can, while we can.
Stewart Dougherty
Stewart Dougherty is the creator of Inferential Analytics, a forecasting method that applies to events proprietary, time-tested principles of human instinct, desire and action. In his view, forecasting methods not fundamentally based upon principles of human action are unlikely to be reliable over time. He is a graduate of Tufts University and Harvard Business School and has developed IA over a period of 15+ years.
October 31, 2016 | 0 |
Hospitals raise their prices despite public outcry from over-burdened patients
Thursday, October 27, 2016 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer Tags: hospital visits , rising prices , healthcare costs (NaturalNews) When word got out last year that a handful of hospitals throughout Florida were massively price-gouging their patients, experts predicted that the outrageous bills for services at these care facilities would quickly drop in response. But the exact opposite occurred, a new investigation has found, with many of these same hospitals not only charging the same ridiculous prices, but in some cases drastically more .Researchers from the University of Miami looked at hospital prices both before and after the media picked up on the issue, evaluating the billing schemes at some 50 of the priciest Florida hospitals to see how they may have changed. They looked at these hospitals' total billing charges in the quarter of a year before news of the gouging first broke headlines, as well as in the quarter post-headlines.In a five-year period spanning from 2010–2015, Bayfront Health Dade City topped the list of Florida's most expensive hospitals, with price increases nearly doubling. Following were Kendall Regional Medical Center, Heart of Florida Regional Medical Center, North Okaloosa Medical Center and Sebastian River Medical Center.All of these facilities, and many others, despite having their names tarnished for taking advantage of patients, were found to still be charging the same or even higher prices in 2016, the researchers learned. Other than a minor setback of temporarily decreased share prices, these exploitative care facilities are continuing to get away with jacking their prices , and with no end in sight."We were thinking we would see a drop or lowering of some charges," Karoline Mortensen, co-author of a study published in the Journal of Health Care Finance that looked at hospital prices both before and after the publicity, told The Washington Post (WP) . "There's nothing stopping them. They're not being held accountable to anyone." The insurance system is utterly broken, and uninsured patients are even worse off Part of the problem is that hospitals in most states can legally charge whatever they want for medical services because they know that a bulk of their patients' insurance companies will simply foot the bill. Insurance companies are responsible for negotiating rates, which they typically do on behalf of patients, so in the end prices decrease, at least to some degree.But hospital costs are still prohibitively and unnecessarily expensive in many cases – especially for patients who don't have insurance, and who thus have nobody to advocate on their behalf for fairer pricing schemes. In the end, hospitals are raking their uninsured patients over the coals, while these patients have little at their disposal to fight this medical' target='_blank'>http://www.medicalchoice.news/">medical tyranny.Even government programs like Medicare and Medicaid negotiate better pricing in order to decrease costs, and yet hospitals are still overcharging them at an ever-accelerating rate. With the exception of Maryland and West Virginia, states have no regulatory functions in place to prevent such price-gouging, which is effectively ruining American healthcare.The other major factor is that among the http://www.naturalnews.com/hospitals.html>ho... included in the investigation only one operates as a non-profit. The rest are for-profit companies that apparently care more about making money than they do about caring for patients while charging a fair and appropriate rate for medical services."As http://science.naturalnews.com/hospitals.htm... target="_blank">hospital charges continue to rise and the best path forward to address price transparency continues to elude policy makers and stakeholders, it is important to recognize that hospitals may not respond quickly to public exposure and these initiatives," the researchers concluded in their earlier study, which likely reflects trends all across the country."The primary causes of extremely high markups in http://www.naturalnews.com/hospital.html>hos... markets are lack of price transparency and negotiating power of uninsured patients, out-of-network patients, and other disadvantaged payers." Sources for this article include: www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/w... target="_blank">WashingtonPost.com | 0 |
The Federal Reserve raised its benchmark rate on Wednesday for the fourth time since 2008. The central bank says it is targeting a range between 1 percent and 1. 25 percent for overnight borrowing between banks. [“Job gains have moderated but have been solid, on average, since the beginning of the year, and the unemployment rate has declined,” the Fed said in its analysis of current economic conditions. It noted that inflation has recently declined. The Fed’s expectations for future rates suggest that there will be one more hike this year, in line with what the market had been expecting. Neel Kashkari, the head of the Minneapolis Fed, dissented from the Fed’s decision. He would have refrained from raising rates. The Fed also announced detailed plans for how it will unwind the large balance sheet it built up by buying bonds during the financial crisis and in the years that followed. Questions over how and when the Fed would shrink its balance sheet have been foremost in the minds of investors and monetary policy mavens for some time. The Fed said it would reduce its holdings later this year by not reinvesting some of the funds received when bonds it holds mature. Currently, the Fed reinvests all of the proceeds from maturing bonds. It was the Fed’s third consecutive rate increase, signaling a definitive end to the Fed’s old economic stimulus scheme. The move indicates the Fed’s confidence in the stability of the economy, although it does not necessarily indicate that the Fed is attempting to slow economic growth. Monetary policy makers believe that low rates support economic growth by lowering the cost of borrowing for businesses, homebuyers and consumers raising rates is believed to reduce central bank support for the economy. The Fed’s move came after several disappointing data points appeared to indicate that the economy may be softening and hoped for tax cuts may be delayed longer than expected. Job creation in May came in lower than expected, at just 138. 000 jobs. Retail sales in May fell 1. 6 percent from the prior month, the biggest decline in 16 months. Economists had expected sales to increase in May, following a 0. 4 percent increase in April. Prior to the Fed announcement on Wednesday, consumer price data revealed that inflation unexpectedly fell in May. Core CPI, an economic indicator closely watched by the Fed because it excludes volatile food and energy costs, rose 1. 7 percent . That was lower than expected and short of the Fed’s announced target. The dollar was weaker prior to the Fed’s announcement but following the release of the soft economic data. Yields on Treasuries, which are thought to reflect investor’s expectations of the path of future rates, fell. Falling yields indicate that investors are lowering their expectations for future rates. The yield on Treasuries was down 10 basis points to 2. 11 percent earlier Wednesday. | 1 |
Found this nugget in Podesta files Fastwalkers and DSP Program page: 1 Found this in the Podesta files, ID # 30433. It's probably well known already, just thought I'd post it just in case. Podesta had forwarded this letter he received onto Leslie Kean. Date: 2015-03-06 John – Just tuck this in your UFO files for future reference. One of the government programs that collects hard data on unidentified flying objects is the USAF DSP satellite program. I can add a little insight to rumors published on the web. While I was never fully briefed into the DSP operation directly, I was introduced to them as the US prepared for Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm. On occasion, I had lunch with a few of them in the cafeteria of a highly classified organization in El Segundo, CA. No one could get into the cafeteria without TS/SCI clearances, so this was not “lightweight group of gossipers.” One of these times, a member of that group was really excited – said they’d just picked up Fastwalker (I assumed that same day). He described how it entered our atmosphere from “deep space” (origin actually unknown, of course, but from the backside of the satellite) and zipped by the DSP satellite pretty closely on its way to earth. Not only was it going very fast but it made a 30 degree course correction (turn) which means it did not have a ballistic (free fall) reentry trajectory that a meteorite might have. So, it was under some sort of control – although whether it was “manned” or just “robotic” there’s no way to tell. Although its now 24 years later, one factoid makes me think the USAF is still collecting information on these Fastwalkers. Reading the current official USAF “DSP Fact Sheet” there is this line near the end: In addition, researchers at The Aerospace Corporation have used DSP to develop portions of a hazard support system that will aid public safety in the future. www.losangeles.af.mil... Also, much of the information on this site is accurate although I do not know the author or his sources: ufodigest.com... Somewhere within that USAF program office is many year’s worth of Fastwalker data. If someone were to collect and analyze it, patterns will emerge that provide information about the various types of craft and their destinations, which would add substantiation to eyewitness claims on the ground about UFO activity. Furthermore, it would be interesting to understand the dates of these appearances – is there a certain time of the every year they swarm in (which might indicate a resource mining operation) or might there be a correlation with major events on earth, (such as the detonation of the first atomic bomb at White Sands in 1945 although no DSP’s existed to provide any info on that particular event)? Regards, | 0 |
Pop icon Cher says that old, Democrats and their flawed messaging is the reason why Donald Trump won the election. [In an extensive interview with Billboard published Friday, the singer said the old Democratic party leaders failed to connect with younger voters. “The Democrats f*cked up so bad in their message, and how old [the leadership] is,” Cher said. “You’ve got to pray that old people die before young people can get involved with the party. ” Cher, who helped raise funds for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign, said she “told Hillary she should have a group of millennials give their ideas about government. ” In January, the singer participated in the Women’s March on Washington. Four months into his presidency, the “Believe” singer says she’s so incensed by Trump that she has to hide her phone from herself. “Since Trump was elected, I have to hide my telephone, because I’m so outraged. Twitter is like a drug,” Cher says of the platform she uses to skewer Trump. “It creeps into your life, and you have to say, ‘Time to put a stop to this. I’m a . ’” Earlier this month, Cher compared Trump to a “mad King George III president,” called Republican House members “inhumane,” and predicted millions of people would die as a result of the American Health Care Act. Though it has not yet been voted on in the Senate, the pop star still believes Trump’s health care bill will cause people to die. “The president is cheating and getting away with it, and using the White House to make money, and he’s going to take health care away from people, and people are going die. It’s outrageous,” she said. “You feel like you’re screaming ‘Fire!’ and no one’s listening. ” Follow Jerome Hudson on Twitter @jeromeehudson | 1 |
Netflix’s Grace and Frankie stars Jane Fonda and Lily Tomlin appeared on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert Monday night to riff on some of the legislative setbacks incurred by President Donald Trump’s administration. [“Hanoi Jane” Fonda — who once famously denounced American soldiers as “war criminals” during the Vietnam War — proposed a new business opportunity for Trump. “Adult diapers that can be called ‘Trumpers,’ to help with all the leaks,” she said. The duo, who first appeared onscreen together in the 1980 workplace comedy 9 to 5, joined in the Los Women’s March in protest of Trump’s presidency. “Join us on Saturday! We will not be silent and will stand together. Visit https: . for info see you there! #WMLA #whyimarch,” Fonda wrote a tweet that has been deleted. At the end of their almost interview, Fonda called attention to her jacket lapel as she and Tomlin showed Colbert their matching Planned Parenthood pins, in apparent support of the abortion giant. Fonda was among many stars, including Judd Apatow, and Patricia Arquette, who took part in a Facebook Live telethon that aired during Trump’s presidential inauguration. The proceeds went toward Planned Parenthood and environmental group Earthjustice. Follow Jerome Hudson on Twitter: @JeromeEHudson | 1 |
ISTANBUL (AFP) — Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan took the country’s lawmakers to task Friday over an “ugly” brawl in parliament during a vote on a hugely controversial bill bolstering his powers left several injured. [The fight broke out on Thursday as lawmakers voted on parts of the bill to change the constitution to create an executive presidency, with one deputy suffering a broken nose and another claiming his leg was bitten. “A very ugly situation like breaking the nose of our deputy friend and biting the leg of another is not suitable for any member of parliament,” Erdogan said in a televised remarks in Istanbul. One MP was held in a chokehold while another was left bleeding from the head. The fighting saw chairs and punches thrown while an ornamental flower pot was also seen flying through the air. But the tensions so far do not appear to have slowed the new constitution’s passage which is being debated article by article and will have two readings. While critics say the move is part of a power grab by Erdogan for rule, supporters say it will put Turkey in line with France and the US and is needed for efficient government. Eight of the 18 articles have now been approved with the majority required for it to be submitted to a referendum expected late March or early April. The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) has sufficient votes thanks to an alliance with the opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). But the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) is fiercely against the changes and has boycotted the vote. Erdogan said Friday after the fighting that if parliament “is incapable of working” then snap elections could be on the agenda. “It (early elections) could be conceivable. We could think about it,” he said. The CHP and AKP blamed each other for the fighting. AKP lawmakers took to Twitter to slam “the scumbag” who left tooth marks on their fellow MP. The biter’s identity was not made clear. There were reports Friday that a heavy and very expensive microphone seized from the chamber’s lectern had been broken off and used as a weapon during the rumpus. Despite the tensions, all articles of the bill have been passed easily so far and Erdogan said he believed the first round of voting would be “completed within the week”. “The real owners (of the constitution) are the people. They will decide on this,” he said about the referendum. | 1 |
Elephant Sanctuary Brazil is located on a 2,800-acre plot of land and will be home to 50 rescued circus elephants. By Amanda Froelich
The glitz and glamor of a circus show might make it appear as if an elephant’s life with the troupe is a joyous one, but nothing could be further from the truth. After an elephant is domesticated and trained (aka – ‘ has its spirit broken ’), it spends the majority of its days in chains , is poked and prodded to perform crowd-pleasing feats, and often suffers injuries which result from living in abnormal conditions. Additionally, it’s not unusual for circus beasts to be beaten by their trainers .
Every now and again, fortunately, elephants made to perform for the purpose of entertaining humans are removed from the circus and relocated to sanctuaries. There, they are able to live among their kind and enjoy life on their terms. And now that the first elephant sanctuary in all of Latin America has opened, this is likely to become a reality for many more of the gargantuan land mammals.
Elephant Sanctuary Brazil will be located on a 2,800-acre plot of land. Located in Chapada dos Guimarães, Mato Grosso, the sanctuary will host 50 rescued circus animals. Animal rights activists secured the location for $1 million and are actively seeking elephants to take in.
According to GoodNewsNetwork , the first two elephants to find sanctuary were Guida and Maia, who are believed to have been rescued from Thailand where they performed in circuses. While the sanctuary will not be available to the public, it will post updates about the well-being of rescued elephants via Facebook and through the Global Elephant Sanctuary website .
Source: True Activist
| 0 |
For those trying to understand the political, economic, regional and social shifts that drove one of the most stunning political upsets in the nation’s history on Tuesday, we have some suggested reading from our critics and reviewers. THE UNWINDING: An Inner History of the New America, by George Packer (Farrar, Straus and Giroux) It’s possible that the book that best explains the American that elected Donald J. Trump appeared more than three years ago. In “The Unwinding,” George Packer took a look at this country’s institutions and mores and was appalled by what he found. The book begins like a horror novel, which to some extent it is. “No one can say when the unwinding began,” he writes, “when the coil that held Americans together in its secure and sometimes stifling grip first gave way. ” What follows are profiles and meditations on personalities as diverse as Sam Walton, Oprah Winfrey, Elizabeth Warren and Newt Gingrich. He describes how Mr. Gingrich’s rhetoric, when he came to power in the late 1980s, changed the way elected leaders spoke to one another: “He gave them mustard gas, and they used it on every conceivable enemy, including him. ” His book hums with sorrow, outrage and compassion. (Dwight Garner) STRANGERS IN THEIR OWN LAND: Anger and Mourning on the American Right by Arlie Russell Hochschild (The New Press) In this finalist for the National Book Award in nonfiction, Ms. Hochschild looks closely at Tea Party supporters in Louisiana. In The New York Times Book Review, Jason DeParle wrote: “A distinguished Berkeley sociologist, Hochschild is a woman of the left, but her mission is empathy, not polemics. She takes seriously the Tea Partiers’ complaints that they have become the ‘strangers’ of the title — triply marginalized by flat or falling wages, rapid demographic change, and liberal culture that mocks their faith and patriotism. Her affection for her characters is palpable. “But the resentments she finds are as toxic as the pollutants in the marsh and metastasizing throughout politics. What unites her subjects is the powerful feeling that others are ‘cutting in line’ and that the federal government is supporting people on the dole — ‘taking money from the workers and giving it to the idle.’ Income is flowing up, but the anger points down. ” HILLBILLY ELEGY: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis by J. D. Vance (Harper) Mr. Vance’s memoir, which has spent time at the top of the lists, describes his experiences growing up in a steel town in Ohio. In her review in The Times, the critic Jennifer Senior wrote: “An investigation of voter estrangement has never felt more urgent, and we’re certainly not getting one from the lacquered chatterers on the boob tube. Now, along comes Mr. Vance, offering a compassionate, discerning sociological analysis of the white underclass that has helped drive the politics of rebellion, particularly the ascent of Donald J. Trump. Combining thoughtful inquiry with firsthand experience, Mr. Vance has inadvertently provided a civilized reference guide for an uncivilized election, and he’s done so in a vocabulary intelligible to both Democrats and Republicans. ” LISTEN, LIBERAL: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People? by Thomas Frank (Metropolitan Holt Company) In The New York Times Book Review back in April, Beverly Gage wrote: “Liberals may be experiencing mixed emotions these days. The prospect of a Trump presidency has raised urgent fears: of the nation’s fascist tendencies, of the potential for riots in the streets. At the same time, many liberals have expressed a grim satisfaction in watching the Republican Party tear itself apart. Whatever terrible fate might soon befall the nation, the thinking goes, it’s their fault, not ours. They are the ones stirring up the base prejudices and epic resentments of America’s disaffected white working class, and they must now reap the whirlwind. “In his new book, the social critic Thomas Frank poses another possibility: that liberals in general — and the Democratic Party in particular — should look inward to understand the sorry state of American politics. Too busy attending TED talks and vacationing in Martha’s Vineyard, Frank argues, the Democratic elite has abandoned the party’s traditional commitments to the working class. In the process, they have helped to create the political despair and anger at the heart of today’s insurgencies. ” THE POPULIST EXPLOSION: How the Great Recession Transformed American and European Politics by John B. Judis (Columbia Global Reports) This “cogent and exceptionally clarifying guide,” Jonathan Alter wrote in The New York Times Book Review, “helps to understand what ‘populism’ means, where it comes from and why it is advancing on both sides of the Atlantic. ” Mr. Judis distinguishes economic populism from cultural populism, which accuses “elites of coddling an third group — immigrants, blacks, terrorists, welfare recipients or all of the above,” Mr. Alter wrote. “In the end, Judis has a surprisingly benign attitude toward even populism. He thinks Trump and the European populists are nasty nationalists, but not fascists, insisting that even those with authoritarian streaks believe in working within the democratic system and lack the territorial ambitions that were central to German and Italian fascism. Instead, Judis writes, Trump resembles the former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, the buffoonish media baron. ” WHITE TRASH: The Untold History of Class in America by Nancy Isenberg (Viking) Donald J. Trump was elected by America’s wealthy as well as its working class. But this eloquent book is that rare history of America that not only includes the weak, the powerless and the stigmatized, but also places them front and center. It’s an analysis of the intractable caste system that lingers below the national myths of rugged individualism and cities on hills. Ms. Isenberg does not skimp on economic analysis. She notes how the central engines of our economy, from planters up through today’s bank and tax policies, have systematically harmed the working poor. “We have to wonder,” she writes about her book’s subjects, “how such people exist amid plenty. ” Part of her answer is the “backlash that occurs when attempts are made to improve the conditions of the poor,” from the New Deal through Obamacare. “Government assistance is said to undermine the American dream,” she writes, adding: “Wait. Undermine whose American dream?” As if speaking of this election, she wrote: “When you turn an election into a circus, there’s always a chance the dancing bear will win. ” (Dwight Garner) | 1 |
Ulster’s Democratic Unionist Party, which is expected to prop up Theresa May’s minority government over the coming months, has spurned Tory Remainers who hoped they would force the Prime Minister to ask the EU for a ‘Soft Brexit’. [According to ITV’s Robert Peston, a source within the DUP “was very keen to be quoted” as saying that his party “completely backs [May’s] vision of Brexit” — and not that of her Chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond. While both May and Hammond campaigned for a Remain vote during the EU referendum, the Prime Minister has subsequently endorsed what supporters call a “Clean Brexit“ taking Britain out of the bloc’s Single Market and its associated Free Movement regime, as well as the Customs Union which precludes from conducting an independent trade policy. Remain diehards, who want a ‘Soft Brexit’ in which Britain would remain party to the Single Market and Customs Union in order to maintain the closest possible links to the European Union, term this a “Hard” or “Extreme” Brexit. Hammond’s team at HM Treasury — the engine room of the Remain campaign’s ‘Project Fear‘ under his predecessor George Osborne — are said to have entered “ mode” as he canvasses support for such a deal. DUP backs Theresa May’s vision of Brexit, not Philip Hammond’s — ITV News https: . — Robert Peston (@Peston) June 15, 2017, If Peston’s source is reliable, however, it seems the ‘Soft Brexit’ faction have lost crucial leverage. It had been claimed that the DUP, which is keen to see a minimum of economic friction between Ulster and the Irish Republic after Brexit, would at least back their calls for Britain to stay in the Customs Union. The ITV presenter has been led to believe that the DUP is “100 per cent committed to the UK leaving the Single Market AND the Customs Union” — having preferred to use its bargaining power to press for plans to introduce for the winter fuel allowance and scrap the pensions triple lock to be dropped. Leavers within the Government are predicting ferocious resistance to Brexit from without the Cabinet as well as within, with one minister predicting “utterly bitter, trench warfare” as opposition politicians and Tory rebels “fight us line by line, in committees, on the floor and in the Lords, for months and months on end. ” | 1 |
by LN Buzz Team
The Clinton campaign was feeling the Bern after this one…
After being asked to speak at a Hillary rally, Iowa State University’s Students for Bernie chapter president Kaleb Vanfosson decided that instead of encouraging fellow Sanders supporters to vote Clinton, he would use the opportunity to attack the morally bankrupt candidate’s ties to Wall Street in an epic fashion.
“The only thing she cares about is pleasing her donors, the billionaires who fund her campaign. The only people that really trust Hillary are Goldman Sachs, CitiGroup can trust Hillary, the military industrial complex can trust Hillary. Her good friend Henry Kissinger can trust Hillary.”
Watch below:
Well played sir… Well played. Previous Story Infamous NV Rancher Cliven Bundy Sues Congressional ... 0 | 0 |
Donald J. Trump, already under scrutiny for how he uses his foundation, directed more than a quarter of a million dollars from the charity to settle legal disputes stemming from his personal businesses, according to a report on Tuesday in The Washington Post. The payments from Mr. Trump’s charity, the Donald J. Trump Foundation, helped settle unpaid fines by the town of Palm Beach, Fla. and a lawsuit over a hole in one at a tournament at a Trump golf course, The Post said. The New York attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman, who regulates charities in the state, said last week that he was looking into the foundation to see whether it was in compliance with state laws. His office declined to comment on Tuesday about whether it would look into the donations tied to Mr. Trump’s business disputes. A group of congressional Democrats has also asked the Department of Justice to look into a $25, 000 political donation made through the foundation in support of Florida’s attorney general, Pam Bondi, around the time her office was reviewing allegations against Mr. Trump’s education programs. Ms. Bondi ultimately decided not to take action against Mr. Trump. Aides to Mr. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, have said that donation was made in error from the foundation. Jason Miller, a spokesman for the Trump campaign, discounted the latest revelations, saying in a statement that foundation transactions had been publicly disclosed. “There was not, and could not be, any intent or motive for the Trump Foundation to make improper payments,” he said. Legal experts said the foundation’s donations in connection with litigation involving Mr. Trump’s personal businesses may have violated tax regulations that prohibit using nonprofit charities for private interests. “That’s way across the line,” said Lloyd Mayer, a professor at Notre Dame Law School who specializes in nonprofit and tax law. “It’s not even close. It’s clearly for a private foundation like the Trump Foundation. ” Mr. Mayer said he was surprised about the amount of money involved in the Trump expenditures. “I haven’t seen numbers this large before,” he said. In one instance reported by The Post, the foundation made a $158, 000 donation to settle a lawsuit by a golfer who was denied a promised $1 million payout for getting a hole in one at a charity golf tournament at a Trump course in Westchester County, N. Y. The organization that put on the event, Alonzo Mourning Charities, had bought an insurance policy to cover any holes in one, but the insurer refused to pay the prize after determining that the golfer’s tee shot was a few yards shorter than the 150 yards required by the policy. As part of the settlement, both Mr. Trump’s club and Alonzo Mourning Charities had to donate money to a charity of the golfer’s choosing. The club’s donation, according to tax records, came from the Trump Foundation. In another case, the foundation paid $100, 000 in 2007 to Fisher House Foundation, a veterans’ cause, as part of a settlement for fines racked up by Mr. Trump’s Club in Palm Beach when it hoisted an oversize pole for an American flag. Other unusual donations from the foundation have included $20, 000 paid to an artist to paint a portrait of Mr. Trump, and $12, 000 for an autographed helmet from the football player Tim Tebow. A compounding factor for Mr. Trump is that he has given relatively little of his own money to the foundation in recent years, it has relied almost exclusively on donations from others. Mr. Trump and his campaign have deflected questions about his foundation, saying that he has donated “tens of millions of dollars” to charities, through his charity and directly from personal accounts, and that his friends have also contributed to help “worthy causes. ” But Mr. Trump has refused to release his personal tax returns, which would indicate how much money he reported giving away. On Tuesday, the campaign of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, seized on the revelations about the mixing of foundation money with business issues. “Once again, Trump has proven himself a fraud who believes the rules don’t apply to him,” said Christina Reynolds, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Clinton. “It’s past time for him to release his tax returns to show whether his tax issues extend to his own personal finances. ” Mr. Trump paid a $2, 500 penalty to the Internal Revenue Service for his foundation’s donation in support of Ms. Bondi. Some of the other expenditures may have occurred too long ago to be taxed and fined under the statute of limitations, said Marc Owens, a Washington lawyer who was formerly the director of the I. R. S. ’s organizations division. But he said there could be other ways the I. R. S. or the New York attorney general, could pursue the foundation. “I don’t recall ever seeing a pattern of that encompasses so many different kinds of ” he said. | 1 |
« on: Today at 05:27:09 PM » I live in Texas, and the news now is that this may be a "swing state":"If nothing else has driven home exactly how weird this election is, this should do it: RealClearPolitics has found that Texas is an electoral toss up. Texas, the blood-red, deeply conservative bastion of all things far right, is a statistical dead heat between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton." http://thedailybanter.com/2016/10/texas-swing-state/ Just search "Texas Swing State" for lots of articles on this. The one above shows Clinton at 46% and Trump at 45%. I call BS. There is no way, no way in hell, that Bill Clinton's wife and a pig in her own right is within single digits of Donald Trump in Texas. But that doesn't mean that there won't be an attempt to steal the state's electoral votes. I knew a couple of months ago, when elitist mouthpiece Rush Limbaugh said it was a "one-point race in Texas," that we were being psychologically prepped for the flipping of the state from Republican to Democrat.It could be that we're about to see a sleight-of-hand trick on election night. While all attention is fixed on Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and the other swing states, lo and behold, Hillary won Texas!Awarding her the state would have two benefits. First, she'd get our 38 electoral votes, second, any "secession" talk would be scrapped. How could we justify secession, since we voted for Hillary?Anyway, we're watching you, DNC. Keep your hands off our electoral votes. Logged | 0 |
Friday 18 November 2016 by Lucas Wilde Petition to have Michael Gove cryogenically frozen reaches 9 million
Britain is extremely keen for Michael Gove to be shoved into a freezer, it has emerged.
A petition to put Gove on ice reached 9 million signatures last night, the ramifications of which would see the little bastard shoved into a deep freeze whether he fancies it, or not.
“I’ve signed it twice,” beamed non-expert, Simon Williams.
“I’ve even got a spare chest freezer we could use. It’s only waist-height, but I’m sure we can fold him into it somehow, with a hammer if necessary.
“I’m pretty sure that’s how cryogenics works, having watched Batman and Robin nearly all the way through.
“I’ve not heard what Gove thinks about all of this, but frankly I’m not too bothered about that.”
A spokesperson for Mr Gove said, “Michael is delighted by all of this.
“In fact, he has instructed me to deliver him to the nearest branch of Currys as soon as possible, and to ignore any protests he might make.
“He says he might put up a bit of a fight getting into the freezer, but he would like to assure the public that this is all part of the experience.
“I can give my own personal assurance that Michael has given his full, honest consent to being frozen.
“He’s also well up for said freezer to be fired directly into the sun.” Get the best NewsThump stories in your mailbox every Friday, for FREE! There are currently | 0 |
Email
Watch this devout Muslim run wild through the Cascade mall opening fire on unsuspecting shoppers, searching for more victims as they ran for their lives — in the cause of Islam , the religion of peace . Any criticism of this savagery will result in charges of being “racist” and “islamophobic” – embrace it, we are told.
Video released of shooting rampage by Muslim migrant and Hillary Clinton illegal voter. Arcan Cetin, 20, of Oak Harbor, Washington was an immigrant from Turkey — not a citizen, but a legal permanent resident of the United States.
And Hillary wants to increase the hijrah by 550%.
Video Released From Washington State Mall Shooting
Burlington WA – Video footage from a mall in Washington state captured the fear and panic that broke out when a man carrying a rifle opened fire inside a Macy’s department store.
Some shoppers at the Cascade Mall in Burlington, Washington, ran and others hid behind clothing racks as a lone shooter with a rifle searched for his targets.
He fired at a teenage girl near some racks, shot a woman trying to hide from him behind a counter and killed two women who huddled together.
The Sept. 23 shooting left a teenage girl, three women and one man dead.
Arcan Cetin of Oak Harbor is being held on suspicion of five counts of first-degree, premeditated
murder. Bail was set at $2 million. Prosecutors have until Jan. 6, 2017 to file formal charges.
Article reposted with permission from PamelaGeller.com | 0 |
After Netflix CEO Reed Hastings dismissed net neutrality as an issue that was only important to “the Netflix of ten years ago” at a conference two weeks ago, the company’s Twitter account sent out a tweet claiming they would “never outgrow” the cause. [The tweet linked to BattleForTheNet. com, a site dedicated to a “Day of Action” on July 12th where multiple companies will protest against efforts by the FCC to roll back their current rulings on neutrality online. Netflix will never outgrow the fight for #NetNeutrality. Everyone deserves an open Internet. https: . — Netflix US (@netflix) June 15, 2017, Netflix joins the already growing list of companies and groups that are part of the effort, including Amazon, Reddit, Etsy, Kickstart, and GitHub. This is in contrast to the comments made by Hastings at Recode’s Code Conference last month. Hastings claimed that Netflix is too big a company to bother with issues like net neutrality that wouldn’t greatly affect them anymore: It’s not our primary battle at this point. Other people it is, and that’s an important thing, and we’re supportive through the industry association, but I think you’re right that we don’t have the special vulnerability to it. We had to carry the water when we were growing up and we were small. Now other companies need to be on that leading edge. Jack Hadfield is a student at the University of Warwick and a regular contributor to Breitbart Tech. You can like his page on Facebook and follow him on Twitter @ToryBastard_ or on Gab @JH. | 1 |
Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage is to be a “close but unofficial” advisor to U. S. President Donald Trump, the Governor of Mississippi has said. [Speaking at a party thrown for Mr Farage on the top floor of the Hay Adams hotel, Phil Bryant said: “There is an opportunity for him to work directly with the president, we call it ‘close but unofficial’. “I think you will see that type of relationship between Nigel Farage and the president where he will turn to Nigel for advice about Great Britain. ” The Telegraph quotes Mr Bryant as adding: “I don’t want to speak for the president but I know that the president has a great deal of trust in Nigel Farage, and I think he is going to turn to him as an adviser and there would be none better. ” He described the former UKIP leader as a “humble man who just believes in Great Britain and trying to make sure it achieves that greatness”. Mr Bryant added that Brexit will be a massive boost for Britain, saying: “I remind all our friends here — there is a reason they call it Great Britain. It is going to be great again. ” Mr Farage spoke at the same event, saying how he was “proud” to have played a part in Donald Trump’s election. “At times it wasn’t necessarily that easy to be helping the Trump campaign,” he said. “There were one or two low moments. But I think what’s exciting is that 2016 will be looked at in ten years’ time, in a hundred years’ time, as a year of a great pivot, of a great change. “A year when nation state democracy reasserted itself. A year when proper decent values reasserted themselves. And I think through 2017 much of this revolution will continue across much of what is left of Mr. Juncker’s European Union. ” | 1 |
Oh, What a Lovely War! Delusional foreign policy could bring disaster Email This Page to Someone Your Name Here's
The American people don’t know very much about war even if Washington has been fighting on multiple fronts since 9/11. The continental United States has not experienced the presence a hostile military force for more than 100 years and war for the current generation of Americans consists largely of the insights provided by video games and movies. The Pentagon’s invention of embedded journalists, which limits any independent media insight into what is going on overseas, has contributed to the rendering of war as some kind of abstraction. Gone forever is anything like the press coverage of Vietnam, with nightly news and other media presentations showing prisoners being executed and young girls screaming while racing down the street in flames.
Given all of that, it is perhaps no surprise that both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, neither of whom has served in uniform, should regard violence inflicted on people overseas with a considerable level of detachment. Hillary is notorious for her assessment of the brutal killing of Libya’s Moammar Gaddafi, saying “We came, we saw, he died.” They both share to an extent the dominant New York-Washington policy consensus view that dealing with foreigners can sometimes get a bit bloody, but that is a price that someone in power has to be prepared to pay. One of Hillary’s top advisers, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, famously declared that the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children due to U.S. led sanctions were “worth it.”
In the election campaign there has, in fact, been little discussion of the issue of war and peace or even of America’s place in the world, though Trump did at one point note correctly that implementation of Hillary’s suggested foreign policy could escalate into World War III. It has been my contention that the issue of war should be more front and center in the minds of Americans when they cast their ballots as the prospect of an armed conflict in which little is actually at stake escalating and going nuclear could conceivably end life on this planet as we know it.
With that in mind, it is useful to consider what the two candidates have been promising. First, Hillary, who might reasonably be designated the Establishment’s war candidate though she carefully wraps it in humanitarian “liberal interventionism.” As Senator and Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has always viewed a foreign crisis as an opportunity to use aggressive measures to seek a resolution. She can always be relied upon to “do something,” a reflection of the neocon driven Washington foreign policy consensus.
Hillary Clinton and her advisors, who believe strongly in Washington’s leadership role globally and embrace their own definition of American exceptionalism, have been explicit in terms of what they would do to employ our military power. She would be an extremely proactive president in foreign policy, with a particular animus directed against Russia. And, unfortunately, there would be little or no pushback against the exercise of her admittedly poor instincts regarding what to do, as was demonstrated regarding Libya and also with Benghazi. She would find little opposition in Congress and the media for an extremely risky foreign policy, and would benefit from the Washington groupthink that prevails over the alleged threats emanating from Russia, Iran, and China.
Hillary has received support from foreign policy hawks, including a large number of formerly Republican neocons, to include Robert Kagan, Michael Chertoff, Michael Hayden, Eliot Cohen and Eric Edelman. James Stavridis, a retired admiral who was once vetted by Clinton as a possible vice president, recently warned of “the need to use deadly force against the Iranians. I think it’s coming. It’s going to be maritime confrontation and if it doesn’t happen immediately, I’ll bet you a dollar it’s going to be happening after the presidential election, whoever is elected.”
Hillary believes that Syria’s president Bashar al-Assad is the root cause of the turmoil in that country and must be removed as the first priority. . It is a foolish policy as al-Assad in no way threatens the United States while his enemy ISIS does and regime change would create a power vacuum that will benefit the latter. She has also called for a no-fly zone in Syria to protect the local population as well as the insurgent groups that the U.S. supports, some of which had been labeled as terrorists before they were renamed by current Secretary of State John Kerry. Such a zone would dramatically raise the prospect of armed conflict with Russia and it puts Washington in an odd position vis-à-vis what is occurring in Syria. The U.S. is not at war with the Syrian government, which, like it or not, is under international law sovereign within its own recognized borders. Damascus has invited the Russians in to help against the rebels and objects to any other foreign presence on Syrian territory. In spite of all that, Washington is asserting some kind of authority to intervene and to confront the Russians as both a humanitarian mission and as an “inherent right of self-defense.”
Hillary has not recommended doing anything about Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, all of which have at one time or another for various reasons supported ISIS, but she is clearly no friend of Iran, which has been fighting ISIS. As a Senator, she threatened to “totally obliterate” Iran but she has more recently reluctantly supported the recent nuclear agreement with that country negotiated by President Barack Obama. But she has nevertheless warned that she will monitor the situation closely for possible violations and will otherwise pushback against activity by the Islamic Republic. As one of her key financial supporters is Israeli Haim Saban, who has said he is a one issue guy and that issue is Israel, she is likely to pursue aggressive policies in the Persian Gulf. She has also promised to move America’s relationship with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to a “new level” and has repeatedly declared that her support for Israel is unconditional.
One of Hillary’s advisors, former CIA acting Director Michael Morell, has called for new sanctions on Tehran and has also recently recommended that the U.S. begin intercepting Iranian ships presumed to be carrying arms to the Houthis in Yemen. Washington is not at war with either Iran or Yemen and the Houthis are not on the State Department terrorist list but our good friends the Saudis have been assiduously bombing them for reasons that seem obscure. Stopping ships in international waters without any legal pretext would be considered by many an act of piracy. Morell has also called for covertly assassinating Iranians and Russians to express our displeasure with the foreign policies of their respective governments.
Hillary’s dislike for Russia’s Vladimir Putin is notorious. Syria aside, she has advocated arming Ukraine with game changing offensive weapons and also bringing Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, which would force a sharp Russian reaction. One suspects that she might be sympathetic to the views expressed recently by Carl Gershman in a Washington Post op-ed that received curiously little additional coverage in the media. Gershman is the head of the taxpayer funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which means that he is a powerful figure in Washington’s foreign-policy establishment. NED has plausibly been described as doing the sorts of things that the CIA used to do.
After making a number of bumper-sticker claims about Russia and Putin that are either partially true, unproven or even ridiculous, Gershman concluded that “the United States has the power to contain and defeat this danger. The issue is whether we can summon the will to do so.” It is basically a call for the next administration to remove Putin from power—as foolish a suggestion as has ever been seen in a leading newspaper, as it implies that the risk of nuclear war is completely acceptable to bring about regime change in a country whose very popular, democratically elected leadership we disapprove of. But it is nevertheless symptomatic of the kind of thinking that goes on inside the beltway and is quite possibly a position that Hillary Clinton will embrace. She also benefits from having the perfect implementer of such a policy in Robert Kagan’s wife Victoria Nuland, her extremely dangerous protégé who is currently Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs and who might wind up as Secretary of State in a Clinton Administration.
Shifting to East Asia, Hillary sees the admittedly genuine threat from North Korea but her response is focused more on China. She would increase U.S. military presence in the South China Sea to deter any further attempts by Beijing to develop disputed islands and would also “ring China with defensive missiles,” ostensibly as “protection” against Pyongyang but also to convince China to pressure North Korea over its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. One wonders what Beijing might think about being surrounded by made-in-America missiles.
Trump’s foreign policy is admittedly quite sketchy and he has not always been consistent. He has been appropriately enough slammed for being simple minded in saying that he would “bomb the crap out of ISIS,” but he has also taken on the Republican establishment by specifically condemning the George W. Bush invasion of Iraq and has more than once indicated that he is not interested in either being the world’s policeman or in new wars in the Middle East. He has repeatedly stated that he supports NATO but it should not be construed as hostile to Russia. He would work with Putin to address concerns over Syria and Eastern Europe. He would demand that NATO countries spend more for their own defense and also help pay for the maintenance of U.S. bases.
Trump’s controversial call to stop all Muslim immigration has been rightly condemned but it contains a kernel of truth in that the current process for vetting new arrivals in this country is far from transparent and apparently not very effective. The Obama Administration has not been very forthcoming on what might be done to fix the entire immigration process but Trump is promising to shake things up, which is overdue, though what exactly a Trump Administration would try to accomplish is far from clear.
Continuing on the negative side, Trump, who is largely ignorant of the world and its leaders, has relied on a mixed bag of advisors. Former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency General Michael Flynn appears to be the most prominent. Flynn is associated with arch neocon Michael Ledeen and both are rabid about Iran, with Flynn suggesting that nearly all the unrest in the Middle East should be laid at Tehran’s door. Ledeen is, of course, a prominent Israel-firster who has long had Iran in his sights. The advice of Ledeen and Flynn may have been instrumental in Trump’s vehement denunciation of the Iran nuclear agreement, which he has called a “disgrace,” which he has said he would “tear up.” It is vintage dumb-think. The agreement cannot be canceled because there are five other signatories to it and the denial of a nuclear weapons program to Tehran benefits everyone in the region, including Israel. It is far better to have the agreement than to scrap it, if that were even possible.
Trump has said that he would be an even-handed negotiator between Israel and the Palestinians but he has also declared that he is strongly pro-Israel and would move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, which is a bad idea, not in America’s interest, even if Netanyahu would like it. It would produce serious blowback from the Arab world and would inspire a new wave of terrorism directed against the U.S.
Regarding the rest of the Middle East, Trump would prefer strong leaders, i.e. autocrats, who are friendly rather than chaotic reformers. He rejects arming rebels as in Syria because we know little about whom we are dealing with and find that we cannot control what develops. He is against foreign aid in principle, particularly to countries like Pakistan where the U.S. is strongly disliked.
In East Asia, Trump would encourage Japan and South Korea to develop their own nuclear arsenals to deter North Korea. It is a very bad idea, a proliferation nightmare. Like Hillary, he would prefer that China intervene in North Korea and make Kim Jong Un “step down.” He would put pressure on China to devalue its currency because it is “bilking us of billions of dollars” and would also increase U.S. military presence in the region to limit Beijing’s expansion in the South China Sea.
So there you have it as you enter the voting booth. President Obama is going around warning that “the fate of the world is teetering” over the electoral verdict, which he intends to be a ringing endorsement of Hillary even though the choice is not nearly that clear cut. Part of the problem with Trump is that he has some very bad ideas mixed in with a few good ones and no one knows what he would actually do if he were president. Unfortunately, it is all too clear what Hillary would do. | 0 |
0 Add Comment
THE GOVERNMENT has used emergency powers to launch an immediate and wide ranging inquiry into reports that a pint glass was accidentally smashed by bar staff in a Waterford pub but no one in attendance raised a sarcastic cheer.
“This is the cornerstone of our culture, the bedrock of civil Irish society,” Taoiseach Enda Kenny explained on the steps of Leinster House this morning, sharing the troubling news that Waterford pub The Rusty Jocks bore witness to a terrifying ‘anti-Irish’ occurrence, “cheering after glass shatters on the floor of a pub is as Irish as ham and cabbage and voter apathy”.
News of an inquiry was greeted warmly by a shocked public, with many auld lads at the end of bars volunteering to take part in the investigation.
“They say you can lose the soul and essence of a Nation in a fleeting, seemingly small, inconsequential moment, well here it fucking is folks. What pathetic excuses for Irish men and women were in that pub last night at all,” livid elderly man Tommy Cranley shared with WWN.
Some online news outlets had claimed that perhaps the barman who dropped the pint was in an empty pub at the time, which could explain the absence of a sarcastic jeer. A claim rubbished by many an Irish pub expert.
“Nonsense, sure if a pub is empty, there will always be someone passing by who hears it, and then cranes their neck in around the door, to slag the clumsy fucker. This is Ireland, not some cannibalistic wasteland,” Rusty Jocks regular Vincent Clarkin added.
The inquiry is said to also include a disturbing incident in Dublin when a barmaid ironically cheered herself as she smashed a glass, something which frowned upon in Irish pubs. | 0 |
The capital city of New Mexico doubled down on its sanctuary city status despite knowing it is risking losing federal funds. The Santa Fe City Council unanimously approved a resolution reaffirming its policy. [Responding to a threat from Donald Trump to defund sanctuary cities, the council moved forward with plans to refuse access to city property by immigration agents and keep the immigration status of any person confidential. “This is doubling down,” City Council Member Joseph Maestas, the Albuquerque Journal reported. “We’re thumbing our nose at this incoming administration. ” In reference to the possible loss of federal funding, former Santa Fe Mayor David Cross told the council, “If that’s all we’re worried about, shame on us. That’s not what Santa Fe is about. ” The State of New Mexico has gone back and forth on its position on cooperating with immigration officials. In 1986, Toney Anaya declared the state to be a sanctuary state, according to SanctuaryCities. info, a website that tracks such jurisdictions. That decision was reversed in 2011 by Governor Susana Martinez, a former prosecutor. “I did an executive order within minutes after I was sworn into office in 2011,” Gov. Susana Martinez said during a visit to Ruidoso, New Mexico in July 2015, the Ruidoso News reported. “I said there will not be any sanctuary city. Our police officers will ask where someone is from, especially if they are being arrested and put in jail for crimes, because that needs to be considered by a judge. Are you a flight risk or a danger to the community and would you return to court for proceedings to determine whether you are culpable for some offense you are accused of?” The City of Santa Fe had previously passed a sanctuary city resolution in 1999. Knowing the City is at risk of losing federal funding, it is attempting to strengthen its position. “This resolution puts us in a more defensible (legal) position than current sanctuary policies,” said retired attorney Jim Harrington. Harrington has done volunteer work for Somos un Pueblo Unido, the Albuquerque newspaper reported. Harrington told the reporter the U. S. Supreme Court has restricted how the federal government can use funding cuts to enforce policy. Under existing law, the Department of Justice (DOJ) can already move quickly to not only cut off future law enforcement grants to the city — it can recoup past grants for any period of time the municipality was not 100 percent compliant with federal immigration law, according to U. S. Representative John Culberson ( ). Culberson spent most of 2016 working with DOJ officials to enforce 8 U. S. C. § 1373, a law that passed in 1996 to require local and state jurisdictions to cooperate with immigration officials or risk losing federal funding, Breitbart Texas previously reported. “The law requires cooperation with immigration officials 100 percent of the time,” Culberson said in an exclusive interview with Breitbart Texas in November. The DOJ Office of Inspector General certified the top 10 sanctuary jurisdictions last year and notified that they would not be eligible to apply for DOJ law enforcement grants for the coming year unless they change their policies. The current list of sanctuary jurisdictions to be defunded includes: the entire states of California and Connecticut Orleans Parish in Louisiana New York City Philadelphia Cook County, Illinois County, Florida Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Clark County, Nevada. The grant process begins this month. “I had to stand on their ‘air hose,’” Culberson explained referring to Congress’ power to cut a federal agencies’ funds. “For those on the list, it is done. ” The actions of the defiant Santa Fe City Council could move New Mexico’s capital city onto that list as well. Bob Price serves as associate editor and senior political news contributor for Breitbart Texas. He is a founding member of the Breitbart Texas team. Follow him on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX. | 1 |
0
This is great news, everyone. It may have taken awhile, but it looks like the FBI is finally ready to take Hillary down for good! Donald Trump is soooo happy!!!
Just moments ago, the FBI received the warrants that they had been waiting for so that they can search Anthony Weiner’s laptop for the Clinton emails he had stored.
To make it worse, the file that he had stored the emails in on his laptop was supposedly called “Life Insurance.”
You see, the FBI had already searched the laptop once for emails relating to Anthony Weiner and his 15-year-old sexting partner, but technically they couldn’t look through the Clinton emails they discovered.
Well, this warrant will let them do exactly that. We already know that these new emails are both classified and maybe even CRIMINAL. Now we can finally make her taste justice for good.
So I just wanna take a moment to say “THANK YOU” to the FBI. Thank you for finally growing a pair and taking on Hillary Clinton the way she needed to be.
Now we need to share this out and let the world know the good news! Goooo Donald Trump! | 0 |
HOLLYWOOD, Fla. — The head of the Republican National Committee implored leaders of his sharply divided party on Friday to rally behind their eventual presidential nominee, suggesting that they ignore Donald J. Trump’s assault on the nominating process. Reince Priebus, the committee’s chairman, did not mention Mr. Trump by name when addressing the group’s members at the party’s spring meeting here, but he devoted much of his speech to the tensions created by the Republican . “Now I know our candidates are going to say some things to attract attention,” Mr. Priebus said, in a barely veiled reference to Mr. Trump’s attacks on what he has called “a rigged” and “corrupt” nominating process. “That’s part of politics,” Mr. Priebus said. “But we all need to get behind the nominee. ” Mr. Trump is not the nominee yet, but his considerable advantage in delegates and lead in overall votes has prompted some mainstream Republicans to come to terms with the likelihood that he is the favorite, however unthinkable it may once have been, to become their this fall. Yet the lingering split between those Republicans willing to accept Mr. Trump, however reluctantly, and those ferociously opposed to his nomination was on vivid display at the beachside resort where the party gathered. While Mr. Priebus was speaking to state chairmen and chairwomen and committee members in a ballroom, officials from the group were briefing reporters a floor below about its efforts to deny Mr. Trump delegates in the remaining contests and keep him from clinching a majority before the party’s convention in Cleveland in July. More to the point, Katie Packer, the chairwoman of the group, Our Principles PAC, rejected Mr. Priebus’s implicit suggestion that Mr. Trump was worthy of carrying the party’s banner. “We’re selling our soul as a party for what?” asked Ms. Packer, arguing that nominating Mr. Trump could imperil Republican control of Congress. “To lose our majorities for a generation?” Ms. Packer added, “I think it’s very clear he doesn’t live up to our standards as a party. ” To drive that point home, she came to the meeting with reporters brandishing the group’s latest mailing: a pamphlet featuring an image of a buxom blonde, a pug and a pig that read: “Bimbo. Dog. Fat Pig. This is how Donald Trump publicly refers to women. ” Whether the shock value of such language still has any resonance this deep into the nominating fight is an open question, however. Mr. Trump’s commanding victory in New York this week and his expected successes in a series of and Northeastern states this Tuesday has put a damper on the effort to stop him. It has also stoked concern among some that, if Mr. Trump falls just short of a delegate majority but comes close, the small universe of unbound delegates, wanting to end the party’s long and ugly nomination fight, will come his way to hand him the nomination on the first ballot. Some of these political free agents were at the party meeting, and Our Principles PAC distributed a page memo to them and the rest of the committee members, who are all delegates, making the case against Mr. Trump and arguing that it was not too late to stop him. “We believe they’ll follow their heart before they follow the herd and the pressure,” Ms. Packer said, adding that Mr. Priebus should not “make the decision, ‘Well, he got close, so we’re going to go ahead and give him the touchdown.’ ” But the party chairman, while pleading with Republicans to “rally around whoever becomes our nominee,” made clear in his remarks that the R. N. C. would be steadfast in not getting behind a candidate until they receive the needed 1, 237 delegates. “We aren’t going to hand the nomination to anyone with a plurality, no matter how close they are to 1, 237,” Mr. Priebus said. “You need a majority. ‘Almost’ only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. ” Trying to put the best face on a campaign that some Republicans say has been disastrous for the party, Mr. Priebus invoked Abraham Lincoln to note that Lincoln’s intraparty opponents in the election of 1860 joined his administration. “They didn’t just take their marbles and go home,” he said. But while some of Mr. Trump’s rivals for the nomination may endorse him, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, should he become the nominee, many in the party most likely will not. Many of the party’s strategists and staff members, as well as some its elected officials, have said publicly that they will not support Mr. Trump if he wins the nomination. And it was difficult to stroll through the lobby here without encountering Republicans who said privately that they were unlikely to vote for the candidate most likely to be their nominee. Some, but not all, of these feelings could subside should Republicans be faced with a choice between Mr. Trump and Hillary Clinton, the Democratic . But for now many of the committee members to whom Mr. Priebus was preaching unity remain uneasy with a candidate who is waging war against the party and its nominating process. “The proof will be in the pudding in the next couple of weeks,” said Matt Moore, the South Carolina Republican chairman, after meeting with Mr. Trump’s top campaign officials, who offered assurances that the candidate is not running against the R. N. C. “Thus far, Trump is attacking the party and Reince often,” Mr. Moore said, “and I’d like to see that significantly decrease. ” | 1 |
A small has received the green light from the federal government to do something that NASA has not done for more than four decades: land on the moon. Moon Express, based in Cape Canaveral, Fla. announced Wednesday that it had received approval from the Federal Aviation Administration to set a robotic lander on the moon. That feat would win the Google Lunar X Prize competition for the first private organization to reach the moon and an accompanying $20 million reward. But more than the prize, company officials say that it will be the opening of a profitable frontier for entrepreneurs. “Rephrasing John F. Kennedy, we choose to go to the moon not because it’s easy, but because it’s a good business,” said Naveen Jain, the Moon Express chairman. “Everything we fight over — whether it’s land or it’s fresh water, whether it is energy — is in abundance in space. ” Moon Express has a ways to go before it can reach the lunar surface, which it hopes to do next year. It still has to assemble the lander. The rocket that it plans to launch on has yet to fly even once. And one of its competitors could beat it to the moon, and the $20 million. The approval reflects an effort to encourage commercial space endeavors while staying within an international space treaty written 49 years ago when outer space was a rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, and the idea of a going to the moon an unlikely fantasy. “There are a lot of things in the treaties we’re testing the limits of right now,” said Henry R. Hertzfeld, a professor of space policy and international affairs at George Washington University in Washington. “We’re trying to define them in ways that will encourage private investment and private opportunities but not violate any international agreements. ” At present, commercial ventures have gone as far out as geosynchronous orbit, the telecommunication satellites that fly 22, 236 miles above the Earth. Moon Express wants to go 10 times as far, to the moon, a place where just three nations have landed: the United States, the Soviet Union and, more recently, China. The X Prizes, started by Peter H. Diamandis, an entrepreneur, seek to recreate the barnstorming prizes of the early 20th century that spurred aviation advances like Charles Lindbergh’s flight across the Atlantic. The first X Prize, for the first private piloted vehicle to reach space, led to the development of SpaceShipOne, a plane that made two flights in two weeks in 2004 to win the $10 million prize. In the bubbly optimism that followed, the X Prize Foundation enlisted Google to finance reaching the loftier target of the moon. The Google Lunar X Prize, announced in 2007, called for putting a spacecraft on the moon that would be able to send back video and images and also move more than 500 meters. The first team to achieve that would claim $20 million second place would be rewarded with $5 million. More than 30 teams signed up, including Moon Express, founded in 2010 by Mr. Jain, who made a fortune creating the website InfoSpace and then lost most of it in the internet bust of 2000 Robert D. Richards, a space entrepreneur and Barney Pell, a former NASA computer scientist. The original deadline, at the end of 2012, was extended several times now the remaining 16 teams have until Dec. 31, 2017, to claim the prize. Two teams, Moon Express and SpaceIL, an Israeli nonprofit, have secured launch contracts for their spacecraft. As Moon Express worked on its lander, company officials realized that they had other hurdles: paperwork and international treaties. The Outer Space Treaty prohibits nations from claiming sovereignty over the moon or other parts of the solar system. It also states: “The activities of nongovernmental entities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate state party to the treaty. ” The United States fought to include that clause, rejecting the Soviet view that space exploration should be limited to governments, said Matthew Schaefer, the director of the space, cyber and telecommunications law program at the University of Nebraska. While the American negotiators did not necessarily foresee a company like Moon Express, “the U. S. government wanted to keep that option open,” Professor Schaefer said. Nonetheless, that would have been a roadblock, said Dr. Richards, Moon Express’s chief executive, because the United States did not have any procedures for authorizing and supervising what companies like Moon Express want to do. “Any application to the U. S. government would have been vetoed by the State Department, due to the lack of regulatory frameworks that would allow the U. S. government to remain in compliance with the Outer Space Treaty,” he said. Instead, the process for approval was routed through the F. A. A. which regulates commercial rocket launches and payloads headed to space. In 2013, Bigelow Aerospace, a company that builds inflatable structures that could one day be used as lunar habitats, suggested that the F. A. A. use this process to coordinate competing commercial efforts, at least among American companies. Moon Express has now employed this payload review process for its lunar trip. The F. A. A. sent its approval on July 20, the 47th anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing on the moon. Mr. Jain said that missions to the moon — under $10 million — would transform space exploration. But the company has revealed little about its customers and much of the business like the mining of platinum and is speculative. (The would be for fusion power plants that do not yet exist.) At present, there is little worry that the moonscape is about to be scarred by a commercial onslaught. The is about the size of a coffee table, and NASA has left far more litter on the moon, most recently crashing its Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer into the far side of the moon in 2014. Of more concern is the preservation of earlier artifacts like the Apollo landing sites, especially as the Lunar X Prize offers a $4 million bonus for broadcasting video from one of those sites. Moon Express said that it had not yet decided on a landing site, but that it would defer to NASA’s wishes and stay away from the Apollo sites. Mr. Jain said the greatest opportunities were the ones not yet imagined, just as Apple, when it created the iPhone, did not foresee the explosion of apps that would run on the device. “More importantly,” Mr. Jain said, “we don’t know what the Pokémon Go of the moon is going to be. ” | 1 |
Share on Facebook I don't know about you, but Fall is one of my favorite seasons, coming in a close second to Springtime. The transition from the heat of the Summer to the crisp air of a beautiful autumn day, with the awesome color changes of the leaves, is simply magical. As these magnificent leaves flutter to the ground giving off an earthy intoxicating smell, we get to walk through their crunchy texture, so reminiscent of the best days of childhood. Unfortunately, as adult homeowners we can't just let the leaves stay on our lawns and driveways waiting for the cover of snow. We have to deal with the drudgery of clearing them week by week, only having more fall, until the cycle ends. Some people still ‘take to the rake’ in order to remove leaves, making the back breaking effort that takes hours. Still others have gone to the expense of purchasing a leaf blower as an alternative. If you find neither of these choices appealing, the following VIDEO that you are about to watch is for you! I'm always amazed that simple and clever solutions to problems are out there for so many things, and through the ease of the internet we get to see things that never occurred to us. In the following entertaining footage you will watch a guy who came up with a technique that gets rid of huge sections of leaves on his lawn quickly and easily, while he still gets some healthy exercise, and has many more hours to spend on his weekend having fun! It's no joke, ingenious and laugh out loud funny… one of those things that begs the question, “Why didn't I ever think of that?” Related: | 0 |
'Racist and sexist’ complaints against Aussie lamb advert rejected 18:36 Get short URL The ad recieves complaints of being sexist and racist against white men. © We love our Lamb / YouTube The Advertising Standards Board of Australia (ASB) has rejected complaints that an advertisement for lamb is offensive to white males. Several complaints were lodged about the ad which producers say attempts to be all-inclusive with the people it features.
Produced by Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA), the ad titled “You Never Lamb Alone” features a white TV presenter quickly being switched with a Bengali-Australian actor Arka Das who introduces a range of ethnicities and sexual orientations as he moves towards a barbeque cooking lamb - “the meat that doesn’t discriminate”.
http://giphy.com/gifs/bJJo3n1aUke1G
Most of the complaints to the Advertising Standards Board of Australia centered on the opening switch of white TV presenter Luke Jacobz to Das, after Jacobz utters the line “I’m here to address concerns that too many perky white males are contributing to the lack of diversity on our screens.”
http://giphy.com/gifs/7nzEvHhZ1zI52
“This advertisement clearly states ‘too many WHITE people’ in its commercial which is highly offensive,” one complaint read, according to Bandt . “Pointing out someone’s race and gender in an advertisement and then denigrating such race or gender is both racist and sexist,” another read. To whoever wrote this lamb ad, thank you for all the tongue-in-cheek jokes about 'diversity' in Australia. https://t.co/E87jCXMFr3 — she stress@pax prep (@ChattyAnny) October 26, 2016
MLA explained that the line was “simply a nod to the common criticism that Australian television lacks diversity,” with the ASB rejecting the complaints on similar grounds. Well done MEAT & LIVESTOCK AUSTRALIA for “You’ll never lamb alone” winning the Marketing Communications: B2C and B2B award. #AMI #AMIAwards
“The Board considered that the advertisement did not portray or depict material in a way which discriminates against or vilifies a person or section of the community on account of race or gender,” they said.
Currently the video has more thumbs down than thumbs up on YouTube, with comments now disabled. | 0 |
WASHINGTON — “Busy day planned in New York,” Donald J. Trump said on Twitter on Friday morning, two days after his astonishing victory. “Will soon be making some very important decisions on the people who will be running our government!” If anything, that understates the gravity of the personnel choices Mr. Trump and his transition team are weighing. Rarely in the history of the American presidency has the exercise of choosing people to fill jobs had such a impact on the nature and priorities of an incoming administration. Unlike most new presidents, Mr. Trump comes into office with no experience, no coherent political agenda and no bulging binder of policy proposals. And he has left a trail of inflammatory, often contradictory, statements on issues from immigration and race to terrorism and geopolitics. In such a chaotic environment, serving a president who is in many ways a tabula rasa, the appointees to key White House jobs like chief of staff and cabinet posts like secretary of state, defense secretary and Treasury secretary could wield outsize influence. Their selection will help determine whether the Trump administration governs like the firebrand Mr. Trump was on the campaign trail or the pragmatist he often appears to be behind closed doors. “A new president is really vulnerable and open to all sorts of influence by advisers,” said Robert Dallek, a presidential historian. “Trump’s appointments over the next six weeks will be very significant because they can show whether he wants to create some unity in the country, or whether he really intends to deliver on his ideas. ” One of the influences on Mr. Trump could come from an unlikely quarter: President Obama. Meeting in the Oval Office on Thursday, Mr. Trump said he looked forward “to dealing with the president in the future, including counsel. ” A day later, in interviews with The Wall Street Journal and “60 Minutes,’’ he said he had decided to retain elements of Mr. Obama’s landmark health care law after their conversation — a hint, at least, that he might govern less radically than he had campaigned. White House officials expressed hope that Mr. Obama would be able to impress on Mr. Trump the importance of other parts of his legacy, like the Paris climate accord and the Iran nuclear deal. The two will have the kind of relationship that only fellow presidents can have — something that administration officials hope will appeal to Mr. Trump’s pride, as well as his desire to succeed, and make him view Mr. Obama less as a rival. They conceded, though, that there was little historical precedent for such a relationship, especially when the incoming president had ousted the incumbent’s party after such an acrid campaign, and that Mr. Trump and Mr. Obama were never likely to become buddies. Mr. Trump is drawing mainly from a pool of trusted aides and supporters, according to people familiar with the campaign. On Friday, he named three of his grown children — Ivanka, Donald Jr. and Eric — as well as his Jared Kushner, to his transition team, an arrangement that rang alarm bells in Washington because they will also manage his businesses. The Trump family, it is clear, will wield unusual power in the composition of an administration that is already shaping up as remarkable for its clannishness. Even within Mr. Trump’s tight circle, however, there are sharp differences in ideology, background and temperament that could play out in how the White House deals with Congress and how the United States deals with the rest of the world. Perhaps the deepest schism is between Stephen K. Bannon, the conservative provocateur and media entrepreneur who was Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman, and Reince Priebus, the Republican Party chairman who came to terms with Mr. Trump’s candidacy. Both are on a short list for chief of staff, according to people close to the campaign, and whoever is chosen, the other is likely to get another senior White House post. Each would bring a radically different approach to a job often called the powerful in Washington — gatekeeper to the president and often the first and last person he sees in the Oval Office. Mr. Bannon, the executive chairman of the conservative website Breitbart News and onetime Goldman Sachs executive, is an avowed enemy of House Speaker Paul D. Ryan. An verbal bomb thrower with ties to the movement, Mr. Bannon may have little interest in compromising with the Congress under its current leadership. He is an unabashed critic of the current immigration system and repeatedly encouraged Mr. Trump to appeal to the party’s base in the closing days of the campaign with arguments against globalization. Mr. Priebus, a party loyalist who tried to reconcile Republican leaders with their renegade nominee, would most likely build bridges to Mr. Ryan and other Republican leaders. A Washington insider with a reputation for being easy to work with, Mr. Priebus would operate a more traditional White House, though given Mr. Trump’s flamboyant personality, traditional is a relative term. In some ways, Mr. Bannon and Mr. Priebus are proxies for the larger battle over what kind of president Mr. Trump will be. Some former Republican officials held out hope that Mr. Trump would be receptive to moderating influences, but others worried that he would simply listen to the last person he spoke to. “You always have that tension between what he said to get elected and what he actually believes,” said John D. Negroponte, a former director of national intelligence under President George W. Bush. “How selective will his amnesia be?” Mr. Negroponte, a Republican who supported Hillary Clinton in the campaign, said he could imagine senior members of Mr. Trump’s National Security Council warning him about the dangers of “cutting loose countries from our nuclear umbrella,” which Mr. Trump threatened during the campaign to do in reference to Japan and South Korea. But there could be a parallel battle for Mr. Trump’s soul in foreign policy. Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, a retired career intelligence officer who is Mr. Trump’s closest adviser, is a candidate for national security adviser, according to an internal transition document obtained by the conservative news site The Daily Caller, as is Stephen J. Hadley, who served in that capacity for Mr. Bush. Mr. Hadley, who might also be considered for defense secretary, pushed Mr. Bush to undertake the troop surge in Iraq and is closely identified with the military interventionism of that administration. A key figure in the Republican establishment, Mr. Hadley had a hand in Mr. Bush’s second inaugural address, in which he called for the United States to be an evangelist in spreading democracy — something Mr. Trump has flatly rejected. General Flynn, a registered Democrat, has criticized the neoconservative policies of the Bush administration for leading the United States into quagmires like Iraq. “They’ve gotten us into mess after mess for the wrong reasons,” he said, echoing Mr. Trump’s harsh criticism of Mr. Bush during the Republican debates. And like Mr. Trump, General Flynn is withering about the establishment of both parties. It may seem counterintuitive for Mr. Trump to recruit a Bush administration veteran. But Peter D. Feaver, who worked on President Bush’s national security council and now teaches at Duke University, pointed out that Mr. Obama had campaigned “vociferously against the Iraq surge, and then asked the architect of the surge” — Robert M. Gates — “to stay. ” Mr. Gates, as defense secretary, later persuaded Mr. Obama to deploy a similar surge in Afghanistan. “You can say one thing in campaigns, and mean it,” Mr. Feaver said, “and in personnel matters, do the opposite. ” The contest for top economic posts does not expose the same ideological fault lines as those for the White House or national security jobs. But it does raise red flags, given the Street sentiment that Mr. Trump stoked during the campaign. Several of the candidates on his short list for Treasury secretary come from Wall Street, including Steven Mnuchin, a former Goldman Sachs partner who was the finance chairman of Mr. Trump’s campaign, and Jamie Dimon, the chief executive of JPMorgan Chase. People close to Mr. Dimon said he was not interested in the job. Another candidate is a conservative Texas congressman, Jeb Hensarling, who has called for the repeal the Act, the banking regulations passed after the financial crisis, during Mr. Obama’s first term. The least predictable source of influence on Mr. Trump remains Mr. Obama. For all their differences, and the bitter words they flung at each other during the campaign, the two share traits. Both won the presidency as outsiders, and both hold their party’s establishment in contempt. With Mr. Trump lacking experience or the political coterie that accompanies establishment candidates to Washington, administration officials said Mr. Obama would probably spend more time with him than was typical for other incoming and outgoing presidents. And Mr. Trump, some outsiders predicted, would respect the advice of a president 15 years younger, whose path to the White House was nearly as improbable as his. “If you’re looking at things from a hiring point of view, as Trump does, Obama could have done anything he wanted,” Douglas Brinkley, a professor of history at Rice University, said in reference to Mr. Obama’s career options. “That has to impress Trump. ” | 1 |
“Allied,” Robert Zemeckis’s deft and diverting World War II romantic thriller, operates a bit like “Casablanca” in reverse. It’s about how the problems in this crazy world don’t amount to a hill of beans next to the troubles of two people in love. The singing of “La Marseillaise” figures prominently and tearfully in the plot. The city of Casablanca itself functions for the lovers, played by Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard, much in the way that Paris does for Ilsa and Rick. It’s the scene of their first bliss, the place they’ll always have when things get complicated elsewhere. I don’t want to press the comparison too far. For one thing, there is more Alfred Hitchcock than Michael Curtiz in this movie’s DNA. For another, whereas “Casablanca” put forth a call to arms, “Allied” offers the comforts of elegant escapism. Its moral complexities and political ambiguities are intriguing rather than troubling, its ethical and emotional agonies a diversion from rather than a reflection of our own. Which is just fine with me. There are nits to pick, of course. Mr. Pitt, playing a Canadian wing commander in the Royal Air Force, has apparently drawn inspiration from the trees in the great forests of the North. He is handsome, trim and efficient, but the same might be said of a wooden canoe, and his character’s stoical reserve often feels more like an empty space than a deep pool of untapped feeling. This changes toward the end, but the final minutes of “Allied” also provide some grounds for complaint. They are puffy and sentimental, the cinematic equivalent of a cloying dessert following an otherwise meal. If I may pursue the culinary metaphor, and supplement it with a different comparison: “Allied,” while neither haute cuisine or haute couture, is like an expertly tailored suit or a properly cooked classic dish. It’s not so much a work of art as a triumph of craft, and therefore a reminder of the deep pleasures of technique and long experience. Mr. Zemeckis has made more ambitious, more dazzling films — as a dogmatic my list of favorites would include “Back to the Future,” “Who Framed Roger Rabbit” and “Cast Away” — but this one may be the purest and most relaxed demonstration of his mastery. Like Steven Spielberg’s “Bridge of Spies,” it infuses a venerable genre and a familiar period with new interest. The first shot, of Mr. Pitt’s character, Max Vatan, parachuting into the Moroccan desert, is hypnotically beautiful and strange. Your eye keeps recalibrating the perspective, anticipating Max’s touchdown when he is still far above the ground and then blinking in surprise when he finally lands. The rest of the film produces a similar effect, teasing your expectations and concealing cards in its impeccable sleeves. Once in Casablanca, Max is introduced to Marianne Beauséjour, a French resistance fighter who is his partner on a dangerous mission. Their orders are to pretend that they are married, and they end up giving themselves wholeheartedly to the performance, and to each other. Marianne explains that part of her method is to make sure that, whatever the details of the imposture, the feeling is real. That assertion will haunt the second half of the movie, which follows the couple to London. At this point I’m reluctant — though not as reluctant as some of the trailers — to say more. “Allied” is, among other things, a marvel of structure, a perfectly bifurcated story that manages a drastic shift in tone with exquisite aplomb. Max and Marianne set up house in Hampstead she gives birth to a daughter during an air raid he commutes to a mostly deskbound job, and the audience is free to appreciate the work of a superb supporting cast that includes Jared Harris, Lizzy Caplan and Simon McBurney. Ordinary life during wartime — a shuffle of tedium and hysteria, bureaucratic entanglement and everyday pleasures — is evoked in fine detail. Mr. Zemeckis and the screenwriter, Steven Knight, plant almost imperceptible clues that blossom into sinister and scary possibilities in a way that is both shocking and satisfying. You have an itchy premonition that something terrible is going to happen, and when it does the itch is scratched. “Standard operating procedure for intimate betrayal” is a military catchphrase that haunts “Allied,” a plausible portrait of a midcentury marriage that is also a fantastical piece of ’oeil storytelling. Ms. Cotillard, in a remarkable series of frocks, hats, coats and trouser suits, is the key to the film’s spell. Is Marianne a stylized feminine ideal, or a film noir femme fatale — or something else entirely, a modern woman decked out in Hollywood ? You would not mistake this for an old movie. The language is too raw, the sexuality too frank, the politics too cloudy. But you might nonetheless feel like an older kind of moviegoer while you’re watching it: an adult, for one thing, whose intelligence is respected by an intricate, thematically thorny plot even as your thirst for visceral excitement is slaked by clean and breathless action sequences. You also get to look at beautiful people in (and half out of) beautiful clothes. The fundamental things apply. “Allied” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). I’m shocked — shocked — to find swearing, sex and smoking going on in this establishment. Running time: 1 hour 56 minutes. | 1 |
Only a few years ago, the dream of harnessing the strong, steady gusts off the Atlantic coast to make electricity seemed destined to remain just that. Proposals for offshore wind farms foundered on the shoals of high costs, regulatory hurdles and the fierce opposition of those who didn’t want giant industrial machinery puncturing the pristine ocean views. Now the industry is poised to take off, just as the American political landscape and energy policy itself face perhaps the greatest uncertainty in a generation. Last fall, five turbines in the waters of Rhode Island — the country’s first offshore farm — began delivering power to the grid. European energy developers like Statoil and Dong Energy are making big investments to bring projects to American waters. Last year in Massachusetts, Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican, signed into law a mandate that is pushing development forward. And in New York, after years of stymied progress, the Long Island Power Authority has reached an agreement with Deepwater Wind, which built the Rhode Island turbine array, to drop a much larger farm — 15 turbines capable of running 50, 000 average homes — into the ocean about 35 miles from Montauk. If approved by the utility board on Wednesday, the $1 billion installation could become the first of several in a parcel, with room for as many as 200 turbines, that Deepwater is leasing from the federal government. “We’re developing this first offshore wind project in federal waters, but it’s really a gateway project to other locations around Long Island,” said Thomas Falcone, the power authority’s chief executive. “We’re now at a point where developers can build projects at prices where utilities are willing buyers, and to me that is a very big deal. ” These projects could also become an important test case in establishing just how far states can go to to pursue their clean energy agendas under the Trump administration. Before putting steel in the water, the project would need federal approvals and policies that are in doubt amid Washington’s changing of the guard. Wind power has finally become viable for a number of delicately interlaced reasons. It has taken favorable state policies and technological and economic advances to spur the current level of activity, as well as interest among developers and investors, including foreign oil and gas companies that see offshore wind as an important part of their corporate strategies. In Europe, where the offshore wind industry is far ahead of the United States’ costs have plummeted to roughly half of what they were five years ago, said Thomas Brostrom, who runs United States operations for Dong Energy, the Danish oil and gas giant and a leading offshore wind developer. As the industry has grown, manufacturers have been able to take advantage of economies of scale and cut their prices. At the same time, turbines have grown ever larger, allowing them to capture and produce more energy on the same site. Dong hopes to help foster similar developments in the United States. The company bought leases in Massachusetts and New Jersey and opened an office in Boston. “We are here to create an industry,” Mr. Brostrom said. “There’s still a ways to go, but everything that we hoped would happen has happened. ” Dong has plenty of company. Statoil, the Norwegian giant, has been aiming to get into the offshore business in the United States for years, and proposed in 2011 to build a farm off the Maine coast using floating platforms it had designed. The company withdrew the project two years later amid uncertainty over changing state policies, eventually deciding to build off the Scottish coast. Now it is back, having won a auction to secure a site south of Jones Beach on Long Island. Statoil beat out several other bidders, including the state’s energy agency, Dong and a subsidiary of Iberdrola, a leading energy company based in Spain. Statoil pledged $42. 5 million for the lease, which still awaits final approval from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, far more than the $16 million generated by all earlier offshore wind auctions combined. “There’s a lot of companies starting to invest that had been wary of the U. S. offshore wind market and some of the initial lease sales,” said Walter Cruickshank, acting director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. “They have been coming to the table in a big way more recently. ” The appeal of offshore winds as an energy source goes beyond their potential role in efforts to slow global warming. As people flock to coastal cities, where land is scarce and expensive, and conventional power plants are moving toward retirement, states have looked to add new forms of power production. Moving it out to sea has become more attractive, proponents say. The country’s coasts, home to over half the population, offer some of the strongest wind resources in the world, creating, in theory, enough energy to provide roughly four times the power the nation now produces. Though it is easier and cheaper to construct turbines on land, the East Coast in particular offers opportunity because of its strong winds and shallow waters, which means turbines can operate farther out to sea, and out of sight. The potential of offshore wind power converged with rising demand on Long Island’s South Fork, where in areas like the Hamptons, commercial activity was rising and property owners were building larger houses, calling for more and more pool pumps. In New York, the Long Island farm is part of a plan to meet Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s goal of drawing 50 percent of the state’s power from renewable sources by 2030. That includes developing 2. 4 gigawatts of offshore wind, he said in his State of the State address this month, by far the nation’s highest target, equaling the capacity of the Niagara Falls generating station. The wind array would not be visible from Montauk Point, and difficult to see from Martha’s Vineyard, some 15 miles away, said Jeffrey Grybowski, Deepwater’s chief executive. That makes it unlikely to stir the kind of public opposition that all but sank Cape Wind, the ambitious development that would have positioned 130 wind machines just five miles off Cape Cod but stalled in a political storm over blighted vistas. The Rhode Island project allowed Deepwater to work through many of the obstacles that had been holding back the industry, Mr. Grybowski said, including the lack of an established permit process and acceptance on the part of the public and the electric companies. “The Block Island project made offshore wind a reality in the United States,” he said, “so the conversations changed with utilities, who want to know that you can actually deliver on a project that you’re proposing to them. ” Indeed, officials at the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which approved the Cape Wind site in 2010, have spent years clarifying rules and identifying marine parcels suitable for wind power development in an effort to balance several concerns. Those include the needs of marine life and of industry, along with those of coastal communities. They also include the demand for economic development and clean energy sources, from states concerned about both job losses and climate change. Since 2013, the agency has conducted six competitive auctions of leases for parcels from New England to Virginia, and in the past week it announced a seventh, for North Carolina, scheduled to take place in March. Deepwater Wind first proposed the South Fork wind farm in response to a Long Island Power Authority solicitation for projects, but it was ultimately rejected by the authority’s board in favor of several solar farms. The wind developer returned the next year with a new proposal that came close to approval a number of times, but fell short. Now, however, executives have negotiated a contract that they expect the board to approve. Under it, the utility will purchase all of the electricity delivered from the turbines by an underwater transmission line to a substation in East Hampton, paying a price comparable to what it would pay for other renewables like onshore wind and solar, according to the utility. Those prices have run around 16 cents a higher than its average wholesale price of 7. 5 cents. Deepwater plans to finance the project with a mix of loans and equity investments, though it is unclear if it will be able to benefit from federal tax credits that have spurred investment in wind farms and helped reduce the price of the power they produce. Until this year, a federal investment tax credit worth 30 percent of the development cost could be claimed. That has dropped to 24 percent for projects that begin this year and is set to be phased out by the end of 2019. To qualify, the project would need to demonstrate construction activity by then, which could be open to interpretation by the Treasury Department. But wind developers and advocates say the credit is also important to red states in the middle of the country, where it has helped drive the spread of wind farms. Nurturing an offshore wind industry would meet the stated goals of many Republican lawmakers and the Trump administration, including the pursuit of an “all of the above” energy program. Building and installing the wind machines could create thousands of new jobs, as it has in the wind business, in manufacturing and construction. The project would also require special vessels and large onshore staging areas to assemble the components of the platforms and turbines, which could help the shipbuilding and port industries. “We’re a heavy industry that’s poised to build, employ and invest,” said Nancy Sopko, who manages advocacy and federal legislative affairs at the American Wind Industry Association. That momentum may be difficult to slow, even if new federal policies put a stop to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s leasing activities for wind energy, its proponents say. The active leases alone, if developed, are enough to create an industry, they say. And the commitments of states like New York and Massachusetts, and experienced multinational developers, show that the struggle to harness Atlantic breezes is no longer the same as tilting at windmills. “It is a sign of something that’s inevitable, which is the addition of offshore wind into the energy mix,” said Erik Gordon, a clinical assistant professor at the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan. “It’s just going to be too appealing. In the end, the economics trump Trump. ” | 1 |
WASHINGTON — Senator Bernie Sanders met with President Obama on Thursday and said afterward that he would do everything within his power to stop Donald J. Trump from becoming president — and would work closely with Hillary Clinton to make that happen. After the meeting with Mr. Obama, which lasted more than an hour, Mr. Sanders gave no indication that he was ready to leave the race just yet, insisting that he would compete in next week’s primary contest here in Washington. However, he made clear that party unity was on his mind. “I will work as hard as I can, to make sure that Donald Trump does not become president of the United States,” Mr. Sanders told reporters, saying the Manhattan businessman “makes bigotry and discrimination the cornerstone of his campaign” and would be a “disaster” as commander in chief. He said he would continue fighting for the issues that animated his campaign, including enhancing Social Security benefits, college affordability and restoring the nation’s crumbling infrastructure. “These are the issues that we will take to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia in July,” Mr. Sanders said, declining to answer reporters’ shouted questions about whether he would leave the race. Shortly after their meeting, Mr. Obama endorsed Mrs. Clinton in a video. He also praised the campaign that Mr. Sanders ran. The visit came a day after the senator huddled with his team at his headquarters in Vermont to discuss the fate of his candidacy. Mr. Sanders, who requested the meeting with the president, pulled into the White House grounds at 10:56 a. m. after stopping at a nearby Peet’s Coffee for a scone. Mr. Obama and Mr. Sanders strolled down the colonnade next to the Rose Garden on their way into the Oval Office, chatting inaudibly and grinning broadly. Nearby, a thick line of cameras and cluster of microphones were assembled in the driveway outside the West Wing, where journalists peppered the Vermont senator with questions. Mr. Obama was trying to negotiate, however gently, with him to exit the Democratic race without inflicting damage on efforts to unite the party. “My hope is, is that over the next couple of weeks, we’re able to pull things together,” Mr. Obama said during a taping of an appearance on the “Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” on Wednesday in New York. “There’s a natural process of everybody recognizing that this is not about any individual. ” Briefly posing for photographers before his meeting in the Capitol with Senator Harry Reid, the minority leader, Mr. Sanders ignored three questions about Mr. Obama’s endorsement of Mrs. Clinton. His face flushed, Mr. Sanders did not speak at all. But Mr. Reid gently scolded the assembled journalists for asking questions at what was supposed to be just a photo opportunity. After his meeting with Reid, Mr. Sanders made a quick exit through a back hall on his way to meet with Senator Chuck Schumer of New York. He was also scheduled to meet with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. After Mrs. Clinton won Tuesday’s California primary, Mr. Sanders refused to quit the race, despite Mrs. Clinton’s wide margin of victory and the fact that she had the support of enough delegates for the nomination. But some of his supporters have started to walk away, prompting growing calls that it is time to bring the party together to defeat Mr. Trump. On Wednesday, Mr. Sanders sent out a email asking for contributions of $2. 70, and at 7 p. m. he will hold a rally outside of R. F. K. Stadium in Washington, where he will discuss his plans for getting big money out of politics and making public universities tuition free. | 1 |
Obamacare Architect Tell’s CNN that Americans Should Receive Higher Penalty’s in Order for Obamacare to Work Tweet
Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber – the bureaucrat who once bragged that the “stupidity” of the American people was crucial for passing the health care law in the first place – told CNN that the “fix” for Obamacare was to impose a “larger mandate penalty”.
This piece of sh*t should be stripped of his citizenship and immediately deported!
AC | 0 |
NeverTrump Radio Host Does 180, Makes BRILLIANT Case for Voting Trump
Furthermore, at least five employees of the PAC have left it within the past two years to accept senior positions in the former secretary of state’s presidential election campaign.
Combined, these facts made it seem as if the money provided by the PAC to Virginia senatorial candidate Jill McCabe, wife of FBI official Andrew McCabe, was “a payoff,” according to Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center.
“The fact that Hillary Clinton’s inner circle was raising substantial funds for Gov. McAuliffe’s PAC and this same PAC gave close to a half-million dollars to the campaign of the wife of the senior FBI official involved in the Clinton investigation sure looks like a payoff — a major payoff ,” he said. Advertisement - story continues below
The timing of the donations was especially relevant.
As reported by the New York Post , the PAC began funneling money to McCabe’s campaign approximately two months after the FBI began investigating Clinton in July 2015.
Exactly one year later, on July 5, 2016, FBI Director James Comey announced that the agency would not be recommending criminal charges be filed against her.
Meanwhile, Jill McCabe’s husband has reportedly been promoted to deputy director. Advertisement - story continues below | 0 |
As long as it identifies as accounting | 0 |
Home › HEALTH › TOP DOCTORS: CHEMOTHERAPY ONE OF DOZENS OF PROCEDURES SHOWN TO ‘GIVE NO BENEFIT’ TOP DOCTORS: CHEMOTHERAPY ONE OF DOZENS OF PROCEDURES SHOWN TO ‘GIVE NO BENEFIT’ 0 SHARES
[10/27/16] VICKI BATTS – Chemotherapy is arguably one of the medical industry’s biggest frauds . Perhaps that’s why it recently landed on a list of ineffectual treatments drawn up by the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges (AMRC).
The list was created by 11 top specialists, who were each asked to think of five treatments they felt provided little to no patient benefits. And surprise, surprise – chemotherapy was one of them. Doctors from the AMRC said that chemotherapy cannot cure terminal cancer, and may bring unneeded distress in the final months of life. The Guardian reported:
“The treatment is ‘by its very nature toxic’, the college said. “Therefore, the combination of failing to achieve a response and causing toxicity can ‘do more harm than good.'”
Do more harm than good? You don’t say.
Research has shown that in some hospitals, up to 50 percent of cancer patients are dying, not from their disease, but from chemotherapy drugs. For the first time ever, researchers actually looked at the numbers of patients who were dying within 30 days of chemotherapy administration , which could indicate that the treatment was the cause of death rather than the cancer. What they found was horrifying.
The study, which was conducted by Public Health England and Cancer Research UK, found that the average 30-day mortality rate across England was about 8.4 percent for lung cancer and 2.5 percent for breast cancer. But, in some hospitals, those numbers were much higher. For example, at Lancashire Teaching Hospitals, the 30 day mortality rate for palliative chemotherapy for lung cancer was 28 percent. In Milton Keynes, the death rate for lung cancer treatment soared up to 50.9 percent.
The research revealed that the death rate for lung cancer patients was higher than average in several areas, including Blackpool, Coventry, Derby, South Tyneside, Surrey and Sussex.
The data also revealed that about 1-in-5 people who underwent palliative care for breast cancer at Cambridge University Hospitals died because of chemotherapy treatment.
Of course, the industry was quick to defend their practices, with doctors suggesting that these occurrences could simply be the outcome of data problems, noting that even a few deaths could skew statistics.
However, no one really argued with the fact that chemotherapy is indeed a toxin. It doesn’t discriminate; it kills cancerous cells and healthy cells – and therein lies the rub. It may kill the cancer, but not without increasing your risks of getting cancer again in the future.
A 2004 study also found that cytotoxic chemotherapy does very little towards enhancing cancer survivors’ 5-year survival rates. The research, which was led by scientists from the Department of Radiation Oncology at the Northern Sydney Cancer Centre of the Royal North Shore Hospital, located in Sydney, Australia, raised serious questions about the actual efficacy of curative and adjuvant chemotherapies.
What they found was that in Australia chemo only contributed 2.3 percent to the 5-year survival rate in adults, and in the U.S., that number dropped to 2.1 percent. These findings suggest that overall, chemotherapy truly provides very little benefit to any patient’s survival. In their conclusion, the study authors wrote, “As the 5-year relative survival rate for cancer in Australia is now over 60%, it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required.”
The AMRC urges doctors and patients to question whether or not particular treatments are necessary. After all, unwarranted and harmful treatments are truly anything but medicine . Post navigation | 0 |
ROME — When Stephen K. Bannon was still heading Breitbart News, he went to the Vatican to cover the canonization of John Paul II and make some friends. High on his list of people to meet was an archconservative American cardinal, Raymond Burke, who had openly clashed with Pope Francis. In one of the cardinal’s antechambers, amid religious statues and walls, Cardinal Burke and Mr. Bannon — who is now President Trump’s eminence — bonded over their shared worldview. They saw Islam as threatening to overrun a prostrate West weakened by the erosion of traditional Christian values, and viewed themselves as unjustly ostracized by political elites. “When you recognize someone who has sacrificed in order to remain true to his principles and who is fighting the same kind of battles in the cultural arena, in a different section of the battlefield, I’m not surprised there is a meeting of hearts,” said Benjamin Harnwell, a confidant of Cardinal Burke who arranged the 2014 meeting. While Mr. Trump, a president who has boasted of groping women, may seem an unlikely ally of traditionalists in the Vatican, many of them regard his election and the ascendance of Mr. Bannon as potentially breakthroughs. Just as Mr. Bannon has connected with parties threatening to topple governments throughout Western Europe, he has also made common cause with elements in the Roman Catholic Church who oppose the direction Francis is taking them. Many share Mr. Bannon’s suspicion of Pope Francis as a dangerously misguided, and probably socialist, pontiff. Until now, Francis has marginalized or demoted the traditionalists, notably Cardinal Burke, carrying out an inclusive agenda on migration, climate change and poverty that has made the pope a figure of unmatched global popularity, especially among liberals. Yet in a newly turbulent world, Francis is suddenly a lonelier figure. Where once Francis had a powerful ally in the White House in Barack Obama, now there is Mr. Trump and Mr. Bannon, this new president’s ideological guru. For many of the pope’s ideological opponents in and around the Vatican, who are fearful of a pontiff they consider outwardly avuncular but internally a ruthless wielder of absolute political power, this angry moment in history is an opportunity to derail what they see as a disastrous papal agenda. And in Mr. Trump, and more directly in Mr. Bannon, some “Rad Trads” — or radical traditionalists — see an alternate leader who will stand up for traditional Christian values and against Muslim interlopers. “There are huge areas where we and the pope do overlap, and as a loyal Catholic, I don’t want to spend my life fighting against the pope on issues where I won’t change his mind,” Mr. Harnwell said over a lunch of cannelloni. “Far more valuable for me would be spend time working constructively with Steve Bannon. ” He made it clear he was speaking for himself, not for the Institute for Human Dignity, a conservative Catholic group that he founded, and insisted that he shared the pope’s goals of ensuring peace and ending poverty, just not his ideas on how to achieve it. Mr. Bannon publicly articulated his worldview in remarks a few months after his meeting with Cardinal Burke, at a Vatican conference organized by Mr. Harnwell’s institute. Speaking via video feed from Los Angeles, Mr. Bannon, a Catholic, held forth against rampant secularization, the existential threat of Islam, and a capitalism that had drifted from the moral foundations of Christianity. That talk has garnered much attention, and approval by conservatives, for its explicit expression of Mr. Bannon’s vision. Less widely known are his efforts to cultivate strategic alliances with those in Rome who share his interpretation of a “church militant” theology. Mr. Bannon’s visage, speeches and endorsement of Mr. Harnwell as “the smartest guy in Rome” are featured heavily on the website of Mr. Harnwell’s foundation. Mr. Trump’s senior adviser has maintained email contact with Cardinal Burke, according to Mr. Harnwell, who dropped by the cardinal’s residence after lunch. And another person with knowledge of Mr. Bannon’s current outreach said the White House official is personally calling his contacts in Rome for thoughts on who should be the Trump administration’s ambassador to the Holy See. During Mr. Bannon’s April 2014 trip he courted Edward Pentin, a leading conservative Vatican reporter, as a potential correspondent in Rome for Breitbart, the website that is popular with the a movement that has attracted white supremacists. “He really seemed to get the battles the church needs to fight,” said Mr. Pentin, the author of “The Rigging of a Vatican Synod?” a book asserting that Pope Francis and his supporters railroaded opponents. Chief among those battles, Mr. Pentin said, was Mr. Bannon’s focus on countering a “cultural Marxism” that had seeped into the church. Since that visit and the meeting with Cardinal Burke — an experience that Daniel Fluette, the head of production for Breitbart, described as “incredibly powerful” for Mr. Bannon — Mr. Trump’s ideological strategist has maintained a focus on Rome. Mr. Bannon returned to direct the documentary “Torchbearer,” in which the “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson contemplates the apocalyptic consequences of an eroding Christendom. Mr. Bannon also reunited with old friends, including Breitbart’s eventual Rome correspondent, Thomas Williams. A former priest, Mr. Williams said that he used to have arguments with Mr. Bannon about whether the pope subscribed to a brand of liberation theology, with Mr. Bannon calling the pope a “ . ” Mr. Williams said he usually defended the pope, but that recent statements by Francis convinced him “Steve turned out to be right. That happens more often than not. ” Mr. Bannon’s private thoughts about the pope have at times surfaced in public. On May 23, Mr. Bannon and Mr. Williams spoke about Pope Francis on the radio program Breitbart News Daily. Discussing a Breitbart article about the new mayor of London titled “Pope Hails Election of Sadiq Khan, Celebrates Mass Muslim Migration Into Europe,” Mr. Bannon suggested that the pope “seems almost to be putting the responsibility on the working men and women of Italy and Europe et cetera, that they have to go out of their way to accommodate” migration. Was the pope a global elitist, Mr. Bannon asked, “two or three steps removed from this?” Many critics of Francis express similar views, but they are often scared to express it for fear of retribution from the pope, who, they say, has eyes and ears all over the Vatican. Instead, the pope’s critics anonymously papered Rome over the weekend with posters of a Francis above complaints about his removing and ignoring clerics and cardinals. “Where’s your mercy?” it asked. Conservatives and traditionalists in the Vatican secretly pass around phony of the Vatican’s official paper, L’Osservatore Romano, making fun of the pope. Or they spread a YouTube video critiquing the pope and his exhortation on love in the family, “Amoris Laetitia,” which many traditionalists consider Francis’ opening salvo against the doctrine of the church. Set to the music of “That’s Amore,” an aggrieved crooner sings, “When will we all be freed from this cruel tyranny, that’s Amoris” and “It’s the climate of fear engineered for four years, that’s Amoris. ” Cardinal Burke — who has said that the pope’s exhortation, which opened the door for divorced Catholics remarried outside the church to receive communion, might require “a formal act of correction” — has been unusually outspoken in his criticism of Francis. Cardinal Burke and Mr. Bannon declined to comment for this article. Just weeks ago, the pope stripped Cardinal Burke of his remaining institutional influence after a scandal exploded at the Knights of Malta, a nearly chivalrous order where he had been exiled as a liaison to the Vatican. The pope had removed the order’s grand master after he showed disobedience to the pope. There was a sense in the order that the grand master followed the lead of Cardinal Burke because he projected authority, a power that stemmed in part from his support by the Trump administration, one influential knight said. Cardinal Burke has become a champion to conservatives in the United States. Under Mr. Bannon, Breitbart News urged its Rome correspondent to write sympathetically about him. And at a meeting before last month’s March for Life rally in Washington, Cardinal Burke received the Law of Life Achievement, or Nail award, a framed replica of the nail used to hold the feet of Christ to the cross. According to Westen, the editor of Life Site News, who announced the award, the prize is awarded to Christians “who have received a stab in the back. ” Despite Mr. Bannon’s inroads in Rome, Mr. Burke and other traditionalists are not ascendant in the Vatican. The Rev. Antonio Spadaro, a Jesuit priest who edits the journal La Civilta Cattolica and who is close to the pope, dismissed their criticism as the stuff of a noisy but small “echo chamber. ” He also played down the effect of Mr. Trump’s ascent on the standing of Francis’ opponents in the Vatican, saying it was only on a “level of image” and “propaganda. ” The pope will maintain his direction and not be distracted by fights against those trying to undercut him, Father Spadaro said. “He moves forward, and he moves ahead very fast. ” He added that Mr. Trump’s ban on immigrants from certain Muslim countries was “opposite” to the pontiff’s vision for how to foster unity and peace. The pope, Father Spadaro said, is doing everything he can to avoid the clash of civilizations that both fundamentalist Muslims and Christians want. Indeed, the pope does not seem to be slowing down. Days after the election of Mr. Trump, in St. Peter’s Basilica, the Vatican officially elevated new cardinals selected by Pope Francis who reflected the pope’s emphasis on an inclusive church — far from the worldview of Mr. Bannon and Mr. Burke. “It’s not that he is just bringing new people in that think maybe like him,” Cardinal Blase Cupich, the influential new cardinal of Chicago, said after the ceremony. “He is transforming the church in making us rethink how we have done things before. ” That transformation was evident later in the evening, when the old conservative guard came to pay their respects to the new cardinals. João Braz de Aviz, a powerful cardinal close to the pope, walked around in simple cleric clothes, the equivalent of civilian dress among all the flowing cassocks. Asked whether the ascent of Mr. Trump would embolden Mr. Bannon’s allies in the Vatican to intensify their opposition and force the pope to take a more orthodox line, he shrugged. “The doctrine is secure,” he said, adding that the mission of the church was more to safeguard the poor. It was also, he reminded his traditionalist colleagues, to serve St. Peter, whose authority is passed down through the popes. “And today, Francis is Peter. ” | 1 |
With fake polls running rampant everywhere, with Reuters/Ipsos just releasing yet another fake poll oversampling Democrats by 11% and including only “Likely Voters”, then showing the results with Hillary Clinton leading by 6%, we have decided to conduct our own poll.
Our poll is a fair and unbiased poll. We have included Twitter hashtags for #DonaldTrump and #HillaryClinton as well as #GaryJohnson and #JillStein. It will reach both sides, thus being fully fair and balanced. Our poll also includes 3rd party candidates Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein. Voters can only vote once in our poll and their vote cannot be changed.
Thanks to Wikileaks email ID 26551 we now have confirmed data of what we all have long suspected, that polling agencies are being ordered to oversample as much as needed in order to artificially inflate the numbers of a specific candidates which has enough power to pull the strings or is simply preferred by the polling agency.
Most mainstream media polls only include “Likely Voters” nowadays though it hasn’t always been like this. According to their definition, Likely Voters means people who also voted in the previous elections. This is not an accurate way to measure the real preference out there because both Trump and Clinton benefit from what is known as first time voters. People who never voted before, people who feel disenfranchised by the system and who simply didn’t want to vote before.
There is also the Millennial vote which is also impossible to include in the Likely Voters BS the media is pushing. Donald Trump is a revolutionary who vowed to change the system. This has brought millions of new people who never participated in the elections before. Bernie Sanders was also a revolutionary who vowed to do the exact same thing. Bernie lost or better said the election was stolen from him but that’s another story. Bernie endorsed Hillary Clinton so, some of his voters have been transferred to Hillary Clinton now. Those first-time Bernie voters are also not included in the Likely Voters polls.
So without further due, we present to you our own OPEN POLL where everybody can vote only once. A fair an unbiased poll.
Who will you vote for in the upcoming US presidential election 2016? Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll. | 0 |
The storm before the calm before the storm • Stocks GMD -1.3% Groucho Marx Disguises (GMD): $47.05 (-.61) (-1.3%) The company's value plummeted after the unveiling of a newly retooled disguise featuring no mustache, an average-sized nose, and, in the place of this black glasses, stylish wire frames. America's Finest News Source AUSTIN, TX—Anxiously wondering what kind of impression he was leaving on university admissions officials, wealthy father Gordon Fring was said to be waiting restlessly for responses this week after mailing donations to his son’s top college choices. Related Topics Parenting The American Voter
Every four years, against anyone's better judgement, the American people are entrusted to elect the next president. The Onion lets them tell their stories. Trump Holds Strategy Meeting With Campaign’s Top Militia Leaders Ahead Of Election Day NEW YORK—Sitting down with his most heavily armed advisors to go over potential courses of action, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump reportedly held a strategy meeting with his campaign’s top militia leaders Thursday afternoon in order to map out their approach before November 8. FEC Extends Election By 7 Months To Give Nation Chance To Better Get To Know Candidates WASHINGTON—In an effort to help voters make an informed decision at the polls, the Federal Election Commission announced Thursday it would be extending the U.S. presidential election by seven months to give Americans the opportunity to better get to know the presidential candidates. Trump Campaign Training Poll Watchers To Spot Any Suspicious Skin Colors On Election Day HARRISBURG, PA—Instructing volunteers to remain alert and pay close attention to every individual who arrives at their voting location, the “Trump Election Observer” section of Donald Trump’s campaign website reportedly trains supporters to spot any suspicious skin colors they may see on Election Day, sources confirmed this week. Quick Jump To Series Page | 0 |
— Holger Zschaepitz (@Schuldensuehner) October 27, 2016
Deutsche Bank AG’s surprise third-quarter profit was overshadowed by Chief Executive Officer John Cryan failing to dispel concerns that uncertainty tied to a U.S. settlement will continue to linger.
Net income was 256 million euros ($279 million) after a loss of 6.01 billion euros a year ago, the Frankfurt-based lender said on Thursday. That beat an average 394 million-euro loss forecast by 14 analysts in a Bloomberg News survey. Trading revenue rose 10 percent, driven by debt and currencies, the biggest source of income, also beating estimates.
Cryan, 55, has struggled to stem a slide in shares and maintain client confidence after the U.S. Department of Justice last month requested $14 billion to settle a probe into faulty securities, more than twice the bank’s legal provisions. Some investors have called for deeper cost cuts amid concern that the lender will have to raise capital even after eliminating thousands of jobs.
“This is a small step on the path to improvement, but there are still many potholes in the road,” said Ulf Moritzen, who helps manage about 2.4 billion euros, including Deutsche Bank shares, at Aramea Asset Management in Hamburg, Germany. “The mood will be pretty depressed until the big settlements are out of the way.” | 0 |
November 3, 2016 By Shawn Helton 1 Comment
Shawn Helton 21st Century Wire
The cozy relationship between Goldman Sachs and the Clintons has reached dizzying new heights in recent years, giving the Democratic Party nominee Hillary Clinton an immensely influential partner on Wall Street.
As the public and most of the mainstream media is still processing the political bombshell concerning the newly reopened FBI probe into the Hillary Clinton ’s email server case – the global investment banking firm Goldman Sachs quietly endorsed the Democratic presidential candidate this past week.
The financial ties that bind the Clintons and Wall Street banks like Goldman Sachs are nothing new, but never before have the connections been so exposed. Let’s take a trip down collusion lane to review some of the more questionable examples of their political and financial merger formed long ago…
‘MONEY CHANGERS’– Wall Street’s Goldman Sachs are inextricably linked to the Clinton’s and The Clinton Foundation. (Photo illustration 21WIRE)
The Clintons & Goldman Sachs
While campaigning for his first term in the White House, former president Bill Clinton received an enormous amount of support from Washington insider lobbyists and investment banking firms on Wall Street.
At the top of the pile sat Goldman Sachs…
In 1992, the LA Times reported that presidential nominee Bill Clinton,” received the largest share of his financial support–at least $2.6 million–from lawyers and lobbyists,” and that Clinton also received additional support from “…big securities firms such as Goldman, Sachs & Co. in New York and Stephens Inc. in his hometown of Little Rock, Ark. In fact, Goldman Sachs employees and their family members were responsible for the biggest contributions from a single firm: $98,700.”
For decades the Clintons have remained close allies to the banking behemoth Goldman Sachs and in the process, a mutually beneficial relationship has taken hold, something that even the NY Times admits:
“Over 20-plus years, Goldman provided the Clintons with some of their most influential advisers, millions of dollars in campaign contributions and speaking fees, and financial support for the family foundation’s charitable programs.”
By now, there should be little doubt that the Clinton political machine is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Wall Street banking cartel. Their relationship was built over three decades.
The real watershed moment came here…
BLANK CHECK: Bill Clinton laughs with Wall Street elites after signing the Financial Services Modernization Act in 1999.
‘Key to the Kingdom’
In one of the most significant financial rulings in the modern era, the Clinton presidency gave big banks like Goldman Sachs the skeleton key to the kingdom by deregulating the investment banking system almost entirely.
The Clinton/Goldman Sachs/Wall Street partnership was fully forged after the removal of the Glass-Steagall Act , which banking luminaries cynically named the “ Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999″ officially titled the Gramm- Leach-Bliley Act . The original Glass-Steagall was a depression-age four-part provision under the Bank Act of 1933 that strictly prohibited securities activities that could be harmful to investors – the same sort of rogue speculating and paper fiat fraud which triggered the Great Depression (1929-1941). In fact, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which repealed Glass-Steagall, opened the door for the ‘shadow banking’ realm outside of regulatory oversight which led to a much higher trading risk, as banks became more interlinked.
Simply put: Clinton’s repeal of Glass-Steagell removed the firewall between speculative investment banking and regular high street retail and consumer banking – which exposed everyone to toxic, subprime ponzi schemes and fake paper products being pushed around the globe by the banking elite – which ultimately causing the global economy to crash in 2008. All that can be laid at the feet of one William Jefferson Clinton. And Hillary still claims that, “My husband did so well with the economy.” Really?
In a cross-posted article featured at Huffington Post , Nomi Prins underscored the complicit nature of Wall Street and Washington after the removal of tighter bank regulations under the Clinton administration during the 1990’s:
“To grasp the dangers that the Big Six banks (JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley) presently pose to the financial stability of our nation and the world, you need to understand their history in Washington, starting with the Clinton years of the 1990s. Alliances established then (not exclusively with Democrats, since bankers are bipartisan by nature) enabled these firms to become as politically powerful as they are today and to exert that power over an unprecedented amount of capital. Rest assured of one thing: their past and present CEOs will prove as critical in backing a Hillary Clinton presidency as they were in enabling her husband’s years in office.”
Prins herself was a former managing director at Goldman Sachs, senior managing director at Bear Stearns, as well as having worked as a senior strategist at the now defunct investment banking firm Lehman Brothers. Following the financial crash in 2007-2008, Prins blew the whistle on the banking world in a book entitled “ It Takes a Pillage : Behind the Bonuses, Bailouts, and Backroom Deals from Washington to Wall Street.”
Prins has become an advocate for the reinstatement of the Glass-Steagall Act since departing from the investment banking world.
The media outlet Common Dreams described the merger between Citicorp and Travelers Group (becoming Citigroup), which was dubbed the ‘Citi-Travelers Act’ on Capitol Hill. It was a conglomeration that went hand in hand with the Clinton administration’s influence on banking deregulation marked by the repeal of Glass-Steagall:
“Then, in 1998, in an act of corporate civil disobedience, Citicorp and Travelers Group announced they were merging. Such a combination of banking and insurance companies was illegal under the Bank Holding Company Act , but was excused due to a loophole that provided a two-year review period of proposed mergers. The merger was premised on the expectation that Glass-Steagall would be repealed. Citigroup’s co-chairs Sandy Weill and John Reed led a swarm of industry executives and lobbyists who trammeled the halls of Congress to make sure a deal was cut.”
At the time, it was the largest financial merger even though it was technically illegal , as stated by the former Bankers of America CEO Kenneth Guenther . In 1999 , after “12 attempts in 25 years,” Congress passed the Financial Services Modernization Act , which led to the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
The repeal of Glass-Steagall was pushed heavily by Citigroup’s co-CEO Sanford Weill and lobbyist Roger Levy and according to a report by The Nation :
“They laid out more than $290 million for lobbying in 1998, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, and donated more than $150 million in the 1997–98 election cycle—a figure sure to be topped in 1999–2000.”
How much of those contributions made their way to the Clinton family and what kind of impact did this have after they left the White House?
In 2005, Bill Clinton was paid over half a million for speaking at three private Goldman events.
In 2013, after stepping down from her position as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton gave a total of three paid speeches at Goldman Sachs events to the tune of $675,000 dollars, in which one attendee said “s he sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director,” according to a quote obtained by Politico . Indeed, Clinton gave a glowing speech to the Goldman gang and in the process, as Wikileaks released in early October , the Democratic nominee believes in “both a public and a private position” on Wall Street reform and that it is an “ oversimplification” to suggest that investment banking led to the most recent financial crisis.
That Clinton leak provided another window into the much protected alliance between finance and politics, but it’s only the tip of a much larger iceberg.
In 2015, the Washington Post reported that “Hillary Rodham Clinton and former president Bill Clinton earned in excess of $25 million for delivering 104 speeches since the beginning of 2014, a huge infusion to their net worth as she was readying for a presidential bid.”
‘ANOINTED’: Chelsea Clinton with Goldman Sachs-backed hedge funder Marc Mezvinsky.
The Clinton family is chock-full of banking connections, as Chelsea Clinton ‘joined’ the Avenue Capital Group, which according to reports is a “…$12 billion hedge fund whose founder has contributed to many Democratic Party campaigns.” Chelsea is married to Marc Mezvinsky , a former investment banker for Goldman Sachs. Chelsea’s tenure at Avenue Capital Group was from 2006-2008 just prior to Hillary Clinton’s run for president in 2008. Since then Chelsea has risen to vice chairman inside the Clinton Foundation.
Marc Mezvinsky was forced to close one of his hedge funds recently, Eaglevale Hellenic Opportunity , after had the fund lost most of its initial investor funds of $25 million – after blowing the money on secondhand junk Greek bank stocks and toxic government debt.
The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree…
As it turns out, Marc is the son of troubled former Congressman Ed Mezvinsky – another close friend of Team Clinton.
Politico reports on one of Ed Mezvinsky’s financial controversies in 1999:
“In the waning days of Clinton’s presidency, federal prosecutors and the FBI were bearing down on former Rep. Ed Mezvinsky (D-Iowa), who had fallen for a series of Ponzi schemes and pulled in nearly $10 million money from other investors to cover his losses. “
Continuing, Politico outlined new information concerning a pardon request sent by from Ed Mezvinsky’s wife to then President Bill Clinton:
“…records released last week by the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock and obtained by POLITICO show Mezvinsky and his then-wife — ex-Rep. Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky (D-Pa.) — pleaded with the former president for a presidential pardon to head off the looming federal case.”
In 2016, the Daily Mail reported the following: “Chelsea Clinton’s husband and his partners have suffered a huge loss after trying to bet on the revival of the Greek economy, and are now being forced to shut down one of their hedge funds. Marc Mezvinsky, 38, and his partners, former Goldman Sachs colleagues Bennett Grau and Mark Mallon, raised $25million from investors to buy up bank stocks and debt from the struggling nation. That fund however has lost 90 percent of its value, investors with direct knowledge of the situation told The New York Times , and will now be closed.”
‘THE INSIDERS’– A ground-breaking ceremony at Goldman Sachs headquarters in Manhattan in 2005. Hillary Clinton is joined by Michael Bloomberg , Lloyd Blankfein (current Goldman Sachs CEO), Former Goldman Sachs CEO Henry Paulson. (Image Source: ilovemyfreedom )
The NY Times further outlined the long-held Clinton/Goldman connection just two years before the 2007-2008 financial crisis: “The Clintons’ relationships with Wall Street deepened in the 2000s, when Mr. Clinton set up his foundation in Harlem and Mrs. Clinton was elected to the Senate from New York. That brought her in close touch with the big Wall Street firms, a source of jobs and tax revenue for New York — and a leading source of campaign funds for Mrs. Clinton. During her years in Congress, employees of Goldman donated in excess of $234,000 to Mrs. Clinton, more than those of any other company except Citigroup, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Along with other New York politicians, Mrs. Clinton worked to obtain federal tax breaks to resuscitate Lower Manhattan after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and those breaks helped Goldman build its new, roughly $2 billion headquarters. When it broke ground in 2005, Mrs. Clinton and other New York officials were on-site.” ‘HOW TO MONETIZE INFLUENCE’– Lloyd Blankfein at a Clinton Global Initiative event with Hillary Clinton. (Image Source: sputniknews ) The Wall Street Racket To understand who powers the Clinton Foundation’s billion dollar RICO influence-peddling slush fund, you need to understand how money is laundered between Wall Street and Washington DC. Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Citigroup and many others were all ordered to pay millions for misleading investors after the 2008 crash, then in April of 2016, Goldman was ordered to settle a federal and state probe for $5 Billion dollars. CNBC reported the following:
“Goldman Sachs will pay $5 billion to settle federal and state probes into the bank’s sale of mortgage-backed securities before the financial crisis, the Justice Department announced Monday.
Authorities said Goldman misrepresented the quality of loans it securitized and then sold to investors ahead of the housing bubble and 2008 crisis. The settlement includes a $2.4 billion civil penalty, $1.8 billion in relief payouts to underwater homeowners and affected borrowers and $875 million to resolve various other claims.
This resolution holds Goldman Sachs accountable for its serious misconduct in falsely assuring investors that securities it sold were backed by sound mortgages, when it knew that they were full of mortgages that were likely to fail,” acting Associate Attorney General Stuart Delery said in a statement .”
In 2013, a Bloomberg article questioned how Goldman managed to survive and even thrive during the 2007-2008 economic crisis:
“Whether Goldman could have gone the way of Lehman Brothers or Merrill Lynch remains the subject of much debate. Goldman maintains that it did not need, or want, the $10 billion bailout that Hank Paulson [ former Goldman alum] pushed on it and other firms in October 2008. But the fact remains that when the Federal Reserve allowed Goldman and Morgan Stanley—but not Lehman Brothers—to become bank holding companies on Sept. 21, 2008, Goldman was able, three days later, to raise $10 billion in equity, $5 billion from the public and another $5 billion from investor Warren Buffett. That would probably not have happened without the Fed’s expedited decision and support. (A week later, Morgan Stanley saved itself from bankruptcy when it negotiated a $9 billion equity investment from Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group.)”
All told the Clinton friendly investment giant Goldman Sachs (after making record profits) became the fifth mega-bank ordered to pay billions to the Department of Justice after the financial crash of 2007-2008. In addition, the firm was ordered to pay $3 billion to the Federal Housing Finance Agency in 2014 – not including pending private lawsuits levied on the firm since the Great Recession.
In a New York Review article Goldman Sachs was already under investigation for committing fraud at least a year before the economic crash in 2007-2008:
“Data gathered mostly from the Corporate Research Project , a public interest website, show that on thirteen occasions between 2009 and 2016, Goldman was penalized by US courts or government agencies for fraudulent or deceptive practices that were committed mostly between 2006 and 2009.”
‘CASHING OUT’– Bill Clinton with his top economic strategist Robert Rubin. (Image Source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch )
Wall Street Selects ‘Team Clinton’
The Clinton connection to Goldman Sachs emerged in the early 1990’s as Robert Rubin , a former senior partner with Goldman (with a 26-year tenure with the firm), joined former President Clinton’s economic policy team, later becoming Secretary of the Treasury in 1995. Around that time, the Clinton presidency ushered in soaring tax hikes under the ‘Rubinomics’ banner (aka Clintonomics), the plan raised taxes on most Americans, specifically the middle class , in what was said to be the largest increase in American history at the time.
According to Congressional record ( Vol.146 part 2 ), “In 1995, the economy grew at a sickly 1.5% – Clinton’s vetoes of spending cuts [insured] continued deficits well into the 21st Century.”
In a Multinational Monitor report entitled “Wall Street’s Best Investment: Ten Deregulatory Steps to Financial Meltdown,” by Robert Weissman and James Donahue , a clearer picture of the financial collusion spawned in the 1990’s under the Clinton administration was revealed:
“During the Clinton Administration, Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, who had run Goldman Sachs, enthusiastically promoted the legislation. In a 1995 testimony before the House Banking Committee, for example, Rubin argued that “the banking industry is fundamentally different from what it was two decades ago, let alone in 1933. … U.S. banks generally engage in a broader range of securities activities abroad than is permitted domestically. Even domestically, the separation of investment banking and commercial banking envisioned by Glass-Steagall has eroded significantly.”
With a pedigree that included Goldman Sachs, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), The Brookings Institution and the Bilderberg Group , Robert Rubin emerged in 1999 as the vice chairman at Citigroup (1999-2009) after overseeing its merger as well as helping to craft the repeal of Glass-Steagall while serving as Secretary of Treasury. Rubin made a fortune with Citigroup causing sharp criticism in media and from those within the financial sector following the 2007-2008 crash. Here’s a passage from Bloomberg regarding Rubin in the aftermath of the banking collapse:
“When it collapsed, due in part to bank-friendly policies that Rubin advocated, he made more than $100 million while others lost everything. “You have to view people in a fair light,” says Phil Angelides, co-chair of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, who credits Rubin for much of the Clinton-era prosperity. “But on the other side of the ledger are key acts, such as the deregulation of derivatives, or stopping the Commodities Futures Trading Commission from regulating derivatives, that in the end weakened our financial system and exposed us to the risk of financial disaster.”
‘SWORN’– FBI director James Comey sworn in by former DOJ head Eric Holder. (Image Source: thewhitehousespin )
Under the Microscope
Over the summer 21WIRE observed some curious connections between the Clinton Foundation and FBI director James Comey , as well as his questionable handling of other cases related to the Clinton family. Here’s the following passage to consider in light of the new information related to the Clinton investigation:
“Many will also be unaware that before Comey was installed by the Obama Administration as FBI Director, he was on the board of Director at HSBC Bank – a bank implicated in international money laundering , including the laundering of billions on behalf of international drugs and narcotics trafficking cartels. Forbes also points out where Comey was also at the key choke-point during the case involving dodgy auditor KPMG which followed on by the HSBC criminal case:
“If Comey, and his boss Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, had made a different decision about KPMG back in 2005, KPMG would not have been around to miss all the illegal acts HSBC and Standard Chartered SCBFF +% were committing on its watch. Bloomberg reported in 2007 that back in June of 2005, Comey was the man thrust into the position of deciding whether KPMG would live or die for its criminal tax shelter violations.”
In 2015, the Guardian discussed the financial relationship between HSBC and the Clinton Foundation receiving a startling $81 million in donations from clients of the large bank:
“The charitable foundation run by Hillary Clinton and her family has received as much as $81m from wealthy international donors who were clients of HSBC’s controversial Swiss bank.
Leaked files from HSBC’s Swiss banking division reveal the identities of seven donors to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation with accounts in Geneva.”
A new update on the FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation was announced over the last 24 hours, in addition the recently reopened Clinton email probe from last week. It remains to be seen how in-depth this new investigation will be.
To call it collusion would be an understatement. When looking back at the financial affairs of the Clintons, Goldman Sachs and others on Wall Street – it’s clearer than ever that what we are looking at is a criminal syndicate.
READ MORE ELECTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 2016 Files
SUPPORT 21WIRE – SUBSCRIBE & BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV Filed Under: Featured , Shawn Helton , US News Tagged With: 2016 Election , Clinton Foundation , Clinton Global Initiative , FBI , Goldman Sachs , Hillary Clinton , Trump Analyze_This_88
So looks like Goldman Sachs Blankfein bankrolled Chelsea Clinton’s husband, no doubt another payoff for the Clintons loyalty to the Wall Street criminal banking cartel.. TRENDING ON 21WIRE | 0 |
Email Print Pre-election “results” conditioning public to accept rigged Hillary “victory” A NBC station was caught posting election results showing a Hillary Clinton victory days before the election, fueling concerns that the mainstream media is conditioning the public to accept a rigged election favoring Hillary. Political activists discovered a hidden web site for WRCB out of Chattanooga, Tenn. showing election results with Hillary Clinton securing 343 electoral votes and 42% of the popular vote. The web site originated from the FTP server of WorldNow, a media software company that provides real-time data – such as election results – and other media assets to local news stations. The activist who found the page pointed out that the results align well with the “fractional vote” method used by voting machines to rig elections to a predetermined outcome. “On election day, you will see the same percentages overall, with only the numbers that claim to equal them different,” the activist reported. “The difference in total votes shown on the station pages, with the same overall final percentages proves the election theft is automated to hit desired percentages, no one has to lift a finger during the election itself to accomplish the steal.” Election fraud expert Bev Harris was the first to uncover this method, which is also known as “vote shaving.” “You need to have votes counted as fractions,” Harris said on The Alex Jones Show Monday. “You need the votes to be counted with decimal places, like you count money.” “If a vote is a dollar, you also need to have cents with it. That will not show. It’s hidden.” Vote shaving works by treating votes as decimals rather than whole numbers, which allows the machines to allocate the remaining fractional percentages elsewhere to sway election outcomes. “There’s this one central computer, which at the end of the day, all the votes come to it,” Harris pointed out. “That’s where you take it. You don’t run around to 5,000 different precincts. You wait until the votes come to you, and then you have your way with them.” And, interestingly, it appears the majority of the local news stations get their election results from the same software company. Skeptics suggested the WorldNow page was part of a code test to ensure the software would post the actual results, but surprisingly, the data on the page was typed in – with no apparent code tabulating anything. And it’s revealing that, more often than not, when the mainstream media “tests” election result software, it shows the establishment candidate winning the election. At the very least, the results page shows obvious media bias towards Hillary, and it follows a pattern by the mainstream media to claim Hillary has already won the election weeks before Nov. 8 in an attempt to suppress voter enthusiasm for Trump, which is one of his major advantages. This discovery comes amid Project Veritas’ damning videos exposing Democrat operatives discussing how they’ve been rigging elections for the last 50 years, as well as Wikileaks’ relentless data dumping of John Podesta’s emails revealing more collusion and corruption between the Clinton campaign and the mainstream media. WRCB could not be immediately reached for comment.
If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so. Leave a comment... | 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.